Page images
PDF
EPUB

contemplated would be materially diminished by proper exertions on the part of the magistracy; and the community should be made to feel an interest in the subject. It would seem right that a certain proportion of the loss, not less than half, should immediately be restored, upon conviction, to the party injured, upon the order of the judge without suit, out of the funds of the county where the crime was committed; provided the claimant had not been remiss in bringing the offender to justice. Frivolous, indeed, would be the objection that with such claims to indemnity, men would not have a sufficient induce ment to guard their property from violence or fraud. An inducement would remain quite as powerful, as apparently ought to exist in any wellgoverned state. Loss would in nearly every instance be sustained after all; and the inevitable trouble and vexa tion of prosecutions would not appear as things to be courted or lightly regarded. Many a person is robbed or defrauded to an extent either ruinous or most grievous to him; and shall society sternly leave him to suffer, under the unfounded pretence, that to afford relief would be to give a premium upon the commission of crimes? Unfeeling avarice alone could suggest such pleas and such practices, which an Alfred would no more have suffered at this period than in his own age. As to the criminals, even if it should prove impossible to draw much profit from their labour, still they ought to labour with that view, either for life or for a definite period, according to the nature of the offence. Justice and policy seem loudly to demand that this should be a part of the sentence for felony, larceny, fraud and every crime admitting of compensation; and as proving to the criminal that his pursuits were likely to be in every view unprofitable, it would not be without a salutary effect.

Late, and not without reluctance, we appear to be entering upon the reform of our criminal code. The reluctance manifested in relation to this work proceeds indeed, generally, from a principle, which well directed, we could not censure-the principle of attachment to established laws and usages. But dislike of innovation ought to have reasonable bounds, and

not to stand in the way of real and needful improvement. So much regard should be paid to the influence of habit, that the reform of bad institutions should commonly be carried forward by degrees, varying according to the nature of the subject and to the circumstances connected with it. But it is incumbent upon those who would oppose every change professing to be an improvement, by the declaration, "nolumus leges Angliæ mutare," to prove that legislators never make a bad law, and that laws originally good, can never become bad by lapse of time and alterations in the state of society. In the reform of our penal laws it seems that much may be done at once, and a foundation laid for all that should follow, without danger or material inconvenience. To make sure provision for the universal instruction of the children of the poor, attending especially to the means of fixing religious and moral impressions on their minds, is the first, though in one view a collateral, step in this great work. Measures directly bearing upon the subject, and immediately required, are, to amend a large propor tion of our penal statutes, and to esta blish a regulated system of punishments, consonant in essential points to justice, humanity and religion; so that the law should no longer utter violent denunciations in terrorem, but should speak in the simple, impressive language of certainty, prescribing penalties which, not being excessive, should be enforced as a matter naturally consequent upon the conviction of offenders: and to mention last what is of primary importance, the remodelling of most of our prisons, for the proper classification, discipline, separation and employment of criminals. In dealing with actual criminals here, we must look for the chief means of repressing crime; and here the mighty mass of existing evil will demand all the wisdom and energy and perseverance of the supreme and local authorities.* The 24th

*My pen would fail to express the sense which I entertain of the high desert of Mrs. Fry and those who have co-operated with her, of Mr. Buxton and Mr. Gurney, in their endeavours to effect the reform of prisons and of their inmates; but posterity will not be silent in their

Geo. III. c. 54, and other existing statutes have been referred to from the Bench, as providing a remedy for this evil; but it is to be remembered that these statutes in their most material points are not imperative; they permit very much to be done, but they actually require very little. The expense of money that may be needful in the first instance to make our prisons what they ought to be, deserves not to be mentioned as an impediment or objection. Shall we expend 50 millions in a year for the operations of war; for works of destruction; and shall we grudge perhaps five millions for permanent works of justice and mercy, tending in the highest degree to correct and restrain vice, and to secure the persons and properties of a nation? Those who would answer in the affirmative, must be prepared to say in plain terms that they prefer evil to good.

The eyes of contemporary millions are fixed upon the British Legislature on this occasion, and generations to come will review their proceedings. May their acts be such as to merit and obtain the applause of the present and of future ages!

SIR,

T

THE opinion or rather judgment of Sir Thomas Plumer, the Master of the Rolls, on the insufficiency of the Register of Births kept by the Dissenting Deputies, at Dr. Williams's Library, (as reported by your correspondent, A. B., XVII. 728,) may possibly disturb the minds of some of your readers. I am persuaded, however, that the dictum of the learned judge is of little authority, and would have no influence in any other Court. It has been again and again laid down in law, that any register of a birth may be, under certain circumstances,

praise; (if that poor meed could be of importance to them;) and what these private individuals have effected may surely encourage others, and shew that our object in its full extent is by no

means impracticable. And our hopes of success may be strong when we consider that in the present administration there is unquestionably a large portion of benevolence, and of an upright disposition to promote the public welfare.

VOL. XVIII.

[blocks in formation]

Dr. John Jones on the Proposition that the Divinity of Christ was dictated by Heathenism, in order to account for his Miracles.

to flustrate is, That such was HE first proposition which I have

[ocr errors]

the genius of Heathenism, that its votaries, as soon as they had heard of the miracles of Jesus, and had reason to believe them to be true, were unavoidably led to consider him as a God.

The Heathens, it is well known, believed in the existence and agency of many gods. These, as they supposed, often appeared in the shape, or entered the bodies, of men. The Greek and the Roman writers abound with instances of their interposition in both these respects; and the notion was as familiar as that of ghosts or evil spirits, entertained by the vulgar in modern days. When Christ appeared and exhibited in the miracles which he performed the proofs of his divine mission, the conclusion was natural that he was himself one of the gods, acting by virtue of his own power, and not with the authority of a higher Being. a higher Being. I will illustrate this by two examples of unquestionable authenticity. When Paul miraculously healed the infirm man in Lystra, Acts xiv. 11, "the people," we are told, "lifted up their voice in the language of Lycaonia, The gods are come down to us in the likeness of men." If Christ had been the author of this miracle, the people of that place would doubtless have said the The inhabitants same thing of him. of other places would certainly have drawn a similar inference, differing only as to what god he might be, each supposing him to be that divinity to which he was most particularly de

offence.

voted: and if they would suppose him to be a god from this miracle, they would, à fortiori, have had recourse to the same supposition from all his mi racles, and especially from the stu pendous miracle of his resurrection. Another example, illustrative of the genius of Paganism, presents itself in the discourse of Paul at Athens. His hearers immediately concluded that he was "a setter forth of new gods;" and the sacred historian subjoins the reason, "Because he preached Jesus and the resurrection." "Acts xvii. In the estimation of a Heathen, superiority to death was the most decisive proof of divinity; so that in their opinion, to assert that Jesus survived death, was the same thing as to assert that he was a god. To introduce a new god at Athens was a capital erime. Three centuries before, Socrates was put to death under that very charge; and they instantly conducted the apostle to the Areopagus to have him condemned for the same Paul effectually sets aside the charge, by holding forth Jesus as a man appointed of God to judge the world, and raised from the grave by the power of the Almighty. The notion of one Supreme God, as the Creator and Governor of the universe, was not unknown to the Athenian philosophers; but lest the preaching of this Great Being should be made the grounds of a new accusation against the apostle, he, with admirable wisdom and presence of mind, precludes it by an appeal to their own writers, and especially to an altar erected to the unknown god in that very city. Here, we are presented with a very remarkable fact, most worthy the notice of those who believe that Paul taught the Godhead of our Saviour. The people of Athens, misled by polytheism, charged that apostle with holding forth the divinity of Christ as an object of their acceptance. And what did this great champion of the religion of Jesus do, in consequence? Did he meet the charge and avow it? This he certainly would have done, had it been well-founded, even at the risk of his life. On the contrary, he cuts up the charge by the roots as grounded in misconception; and he was accordingly discharged. Had he attempted to justify that doctrine, he would have been instantly

condemned. His acquittal is an unequivocal fact that he negatived it, as a mere dictate of Heathenism.

[ocr errors]

The conclusion on which I here insist, is directly asserted by Eusebius in his Ecclesiastical History, lib. i. 13. The divinity of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ was celebrated among all nations by means of his wonderful power; an immense nunber, even of foreigners, being attracted to him, in the hope of being healed by him of the various diseases which afflicted them." Here, it is asserted that all nations celebrated the divinity of Christ, and that the grounds of this celebration were the wonderful works performed by him. It is clear, therefore, that, according to the surrounding nations who heard the fame of Jesus, he was a supernatural be ing, because he did things above the course of nature.

[ocr errors]

A well-known passage of Tertullian in his Apology, cap. 6, (see Lardner, Vol. VII. p. 243,) draws the same conclusion. Tiberius, in whose reign the Christian name appeared in the world, having received from Palestine, in Syria, an account of the works which revealed and verified the divinity of Jesus, proposed him to the Senate, with the privilege of his own vote in favour of his deification. The Senate, because he had himself refused that honour, rejected the proposal; Cæsar remained of the same opinion, and threatened to punish the accusers of the Christians." Here, again, it is asserted that the works of Jesus proved his divinity. The conduct of Tiberius, who was a Heathen, in proposing the deification of Jesus, proves that he drew the same inference. But it is remarkable that Tertullian, who was a Christian, and who had opportunities to know better, should assert that the miracles of our Lord verified, not indeed his divine mission, but his divine nature. This shews that Tertullian and Eusebius reasoned exactly as the Heathens did respecting the nature of Christ, and that the real source of their belief in his divinity was Heathenism.

Eusebius and Orosius have related this fact nearly in the words of Tertullian. The words of Orosius are the following: "Tiberius proposed to the Senate that Christ should be made a god, with his own vote in his favour.

The Senate, moved with indignation that it had not been, as usual, pro posed to them to determine respect ing the reception of his religion, re jected his deification, and decreed by an edict that the Christians should be banished from the city, especially as Sejanus, the minister of Tiberius, obstinately resisted the reception of his faith." Orosius, lib. vii. c. 4. The fact here recorded has been rejected by most learned men as utterly incredible, for is it to be believed that Tiberius could be induced to think that man to be a god, whom his viceroy in a remote province had crucified as a malefactor? Or, if he heard any thing of the fame and character of Jesus, is it credible that, selfish, sloth ful and negligent as that emperor was of the affairs even of the empire, he should yet interest himself in the case of an obscure Jew, and that Jew executed for treason against himself, so far out of the common course of things as to propose his deification, and thus to place him in the same rank with the tutelar divinities of Rome? On the contrary, it may be asked, is it at all credible that Tertul lian who flourished so near the time, and who withal was very learned, would have dared to hazard such an assertion, if it were not founded in truth? Is it within the compass of moral possibility, that a respectable writer, engaged in hostility with men of rank, talents and learning in the state, should virtually appeal to the archives of the empire for the truth of an incident which he knew did not exist there, and which he knew too, his enemies on inquiry would not fail to negative, and thus overwhelm him and his cause and his brethren through out the world, with the fabrication of a palpable falsehood? Amidst these improbabilities, this curious and important question has been left by learned men undecided; and if no new light could have been thrown upon it, in this undecided state it must for ever have remained. But, fortunately for the interest of truth, Philo, Jose phus, Plutarch, not to mention Tacitus and Suetonius, by a new and ad ditional evidence, enable us to decide the question. The most improbable part of the story is, that Tiberius, from being an enemy, should have become a friend to Christ, and thus

publish an edict in Rome and in the provinces to protect the Christians, that is, the Jews who believed in Jesus (for the Christian name was not yet in existence): and yet Philo, who flourished at the time, not only quotes the substance of it to the folbears his testimony to this edict, but lowing effect: "All nations, though prejudiced against the Jews, have been careful not to abolish the Jewish rites: and the same caution was preserved in the reign of Tiberius; though, indeed, in Italy the Jews had been distressed by the machinations of Seja became sensible that the accusations nus. For after his death, the emperor alleged against the Jews in Italy were calumnies, the inventions of Sejanus, who he knew opposed his impious de who was eager to devour a nation, signs. And to the constituted authorities in every place, Tiberius sent orcities the men of that nation, exceptders not to molest in their several ing the guilty only, (who were few,) and not to suppress any of their institutions, but to regard as a trust com mitted to their care, both the people themselves as disposed to peace, and with firmness and magnanimity." their laws which, like oil, brace them Philo, Vol. II. p. 569. Josephus's account of this transaction is as follows:

who was in every way wicked, and "A Jew resided at Rome, who, having been accused of transgressing the laws, fled from his country to avoid the punishment which threatened him. During his residence in Rome, he pretended to unfold the wisdom of the law of Moses, in conjunction with three other men, who in every respect resembled himself. With these men associated Fulvia, a lady of rank, who had become a convert to the Jewish religion, and whom they prevailed upon to send, for the Temple at Jerusalem, presents of purple and gold. Having received these, they appropriated them to their motive at first in making the request. own use; which, indeed, was their Tiberins (being informed of this by Saturninus, who was his friend, and the husband of Fulvia,) commanded the Jews to be expelled from the city. The young men, to the amount of 4000, were forced to enlist, by a deisland of Sardinia. cree of the Senate, and sent to the But most of

them, being determined to preserve their privileges as Jews inviolate, refused to become soldiers and were put to death. And thus for the wickedness of four men, the Jews were driven from the city." Antiq. Jud. lib. xviii. cap. 3, 6.

Now, if we compare the narratives of Tertullian, Philo and Josephus, the whole affair will become plain, consistent and credible. The Jewish believers at Rome, hating the despotic character of Sejanus, and penetrating his ambitious project of becoming emperor in the room of Tiberius, opposed his cruel measures, and arraigned him as a conspirator. Feeling their enmity against himself, he, with the usual adroitness of wicked ministers, represents them as enemies to the emperor and to the state. This, at first, Tiberius must have been ready to believe; and, actuated by resentment, quickened by the complaint of Saturninus, he cruelly banishes all the Jews resident in Rome, compelling such young men as were of age to become soldiers, in direct violation of the rights which they had hitherto enjoyed. But the mask soon fell from the face of Sejanus, the great enemy and accuser of the Christians; and the deadly hatred which rose in the breast of Tiberius towards the detected traitor, was now necessarily followed by a change of sentiments and conduct towards the persons who had previously opposed him. Thus the emperor, from a persecutor, became inevitably the friend and protector of the Christians. The evidence, brought home to his own bosom, of the falsehood of the charge urged against the followers of Jesus, disposed him to consider their master as a victim of a similar calumny in Judea; and taking into consideration his miraculous power, of which he had, through various channels, unquestionable evidence, he pitied his unmerited sufferings, and wished to atone for them, by consecrating him among the gods of the Pantheon. The Christian fathers, for obvious reasons, left the first impression of Tiberius's resentment unnoticed, mentioning only his subsequent conduct in behalf of the Christians. Hence the improbability which loads their narrative, and sinks it almost below rational belief.

The Jew whom Josephus stigmatises as in every way wicked, was, as we shall see hereafter, one of the framers and teachers of the Gnostic system, the principal object of which was to sink Christianity in Heathenism, by placing the founder with the Heathen gods. Tiberius, though a fatalist, was extremely superstitious; and Jewish magicians, Egyptian priests and Chaldean astrologers formed his most intimate associates. These men he consulted respecting Jesus; and there is no room to doubt, but at their instigation he proposed his deification to the Senate. It was very natural that the Senate and people of Rome should form their ideas of Jesus from those impostors who pretended to abet his cause. This circumstance led, his enemies to speak of him as if he were a magician and an artful deceiver. It was this imputation which induced the Jewish historian to state, in the context, the real character and claims of Jesus Christ. With a comprehension yet brevity characteristic of this writer, he gives the whole substance of the four Gospels in one short paragraph. He sets aside the doctrine of his being a god, and stigmatises the attempt at his deification by calling him a man, if indeed he might be called a man; thus using the language which he uses of Moses, and meaning that he was a man eminently endowed with power from God. He farther passes by in silence the story of his miraculous birth, as forming no part of his real history, a strong presumption in itself of the authenticity of the passage. Nor did the writer rest in this negative testimony to the falsehood of the miraculous conception, but exposes, in the subsequent paragraph, the abominable deed, which, on inquiry, will be found to be the origin of it, and which in those times all readers knew to be the origin of it.

The advocates of Christianity maintained, and maintained with truth, that the vices and superstition which had hitherto debased the Pagan world, and which the erroneous philosophy of the times imputed to the demons, were, in a great measure, swept away by the religion of Jesus. The enemies of the gospel felt the weight of this argument, and Plutarch wrote his treatise concerning the cessation

« PreviousContinue »