Page images

of destruction did previously possess; and from whence,

In the Third place, It will be rationally inferred, that such an exerted power must be attributed to some distinct and foreign agent. The resulting arguments will run thus:

1st. The life which has been thus destroyed, could not have been the agent of its own destruction: but the man himself is guilty of the deed: whatever constitutes, therefore, the active principle in man, must be distinct in its exist. ence from that which has been destroyed by it.

2nd. The agent in this destruction (as it has been proved) must have been a Being totally distinct in its existence from that which has been destroyed: but the whole principle of animation which the man possessed, however exquisite in its parts, or subtle and defined its powers, has been destroyed. Something, then, altogether different in its nature, as well as distinct in its existence from any composition of material mechan. ism must constitute the essential character of the agent; and what is this but Immateriality and In tellect.

passions, specifically distinct in existence, different in their nature, and superior in power to all the purest sublimation of chemical alembics, refined secretions, or whatever constitutes the principles of animation, have impiously excited rebellion against his benevolent Creator, in murdering the creature of his power, which he generously put into his care and possession as the source of every sensible enjoyment; and in despite to the laws of his Maker and Benefactor, both natural and revealed, has even rushed into the presence of his Judge with hands yet reeking with the tokens of his guilt, where we must leave the traitor and return.

Thus, then, by a simple and rational analysis of this fatal catastrophe in human nature, the destruction of the body by the act of suicide, has afforded us an additional testimony to the immateriality of the soul to which it was united.

After all, it is not impossible but the Materialist, against whose tenets the preceding arguments are designedly levelled, and for want of abler subterfuges, may even introduce the doctrine of the resurrection as a presumed antithesis against the allegation of any real or positive destruction of the animal system, in the event of mortality; and from the assurance of a future resuscitation, may prematurely infer the indemonstrability of our former arguments in proof of the superiority of the destructive agent.

3rd. And lastly; The degree of power possessed by the guilty agent in the accomplishment of this destruction, must likewise have been superior to that of any previously existing power in the subject that has been destroyed: but man already proved an immaterial, or spiritual, existence, is this guilty agent. The power of his immaterial nature, then, must Such a mode of reasoning, howneeds transcend the yielding func-ever, will afford him no assistance tions of his material system.

A very general inference on the occasion is obvious. The crime of suicide then is alone imputable to the agency of that immaterial or mental existence in human nature, distinctly denominated-The soul of man; whose perturbated


whatever; for it must be here recollected and inforced, that in pursuing the present enquiry, which is altogether physical, the whole of our arguments, as needful, have been limited to the phy. sical or natural constitution of man; and that, in consequence,


the most absolute and necessary qualifications of his nature could only be admitted.

Nothing, however, of this kind can be rationally predicted of that truly miraculous interference of Almighty power we are now alluding to, and which can only be considered as a mere adjunctive to human nature, and altogether casual and circumstantial; a secondary and voluntary interposition on the part of its Maker, to rescue that portion of nature from a state of destruction into which it had actually fallen, and wherein it would otherwise have inevitably remained.

desperate paroxysms of animat derangement. Brutes and men, are alike subject to this calamity, and the absence of reason in the one, and its disordered state in the other, render them equally innocent of its effects, however lamentable: and, hence, the resulting disquisition, viz.

Why are external objects alone devoted to destruction by the raging fury of the maddened beast, whilst similar derangements in the human frame so frequently terminate in suicide?

The physical impracticability of the event in the one case, for want of that distinct and superior enerThe resurrection of the body, gy we have been considering as then, can by no means be contem- connected with and natural to the plated as a preventive to its des- other, will easily resolve the diffi truction: on the contrary, it im-culty; and whilst it demonstrates plies the previous fact: and the the self-destruction of the brute as physical powers of the destructive an impossibility in the natural conagent must be investigated, indestruction of things; it equally pendent of any subsequent and proves the existence and characsupernatural act of restoration in ter of another principle which confavor of the sufferer. stitutes the difference in human J. K.

The above remarks, it is like-nature. wise presumed, are not a little sup. ported by the evidences of natural history in general.


DEATH OF A MINISTER. MR. DONISTHORPE was the minister of a congregation of General Baptists, at Loughborough, in Leicestershire, in the year

1774. He had been an active

One animal of the brute creation, for instance, will destroy another, and to which nature has lent her sanction in furnishing them with adequate powers and appropriate engines for the purpose. (A servant of the church for many moral lesson is undoubtedly inti- years, and had often expressed a mated by the wisdom of its di- wish that he might die, preaching rector in so permitting it; but this the gospel of salvation. On the is not our present subject ;) but last Tuesday in May, of that year, where, we inquire, is the animal at the advanced age of seventythat destroys itself? The differ- two, he ascended the pulpit to deence of the species between man liver an evening lecture, when, and brutes, implied in the negavour, he proceeded to give out a having prayed with his usual fertive, cannot be rationally attribut-your, he proceeded to give out a ed to the mere absence of a moral hymn; and in reading out

"The land of triumph lies on high;

There are no fields of battle there!"

principle in the latter, an unsusceptibility of guilt, and consequent his voice faultered, and he sank in indifference to the temptation: the the pulpit. He was conveyed to human species is equally safe from his house, speechless; and expired any imputation of moral evil in on the Tuesday following.-See many unhappy events of this na- Mr. Adam Taylor's Hist, of Gen. ture, when originating in the more1 Bapt. Vol. ii. p. 158.



"Ye have not spoken of me, the thing that is right."

a man understand the doctrines of the gospel, without being taught them of God? "No man can say Job xlii..that Jesus is the Lord, but by the "A man may believe all the Holy Ghost." 1 Cor. xii. 3. “All doctrines of the gospel, and yet go thy people shall be taught of God." to the devil!"-Such was the un- John vi. 45. Can a person be qualified assertion of an eminent taught of the Holy Spirit to unpreacher in this city a few Sab- derstand all the doctrines of the bath's ago, when enforcing the gospel, and yet perish eternally? duty of gratitude. A clap of IMPOSSIBLE! John vii. 38, 39. thunder could not have excited in" If thou shalt confess with thy me more astonishment than the mouth the Lord Jesus, and believe sound of the words did; and in thine heart that God hath raised having taken the carliest oppor-him from the dead, thou shalt be tunity of retiring to meditate on saved." Rom. x. 9. It follows, the subject, I involuntarily fell therefore, that the positive pointinto the following train of thought. ed declarations of the word of "Can this assertion be true? God, and the unqualified assertion To the law and to the testimony; of the preacher, cannot hang -what say the sacred oracles?" together. If a person may believe all the doctrines of the gospel, and yet be lost; one of two things will unavoidably follow-either that salvation is not of grace through faith, or that it is absolutely necessary for a sinner to believe something more than the doctrines of the gospel, in order to his Salvation. But let me see what the New Testament says to both of these positions. "Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature; He that believeth (the gospel) shall be saved." Mark xvi. 16. "These things (viz. the doctrines of the gospel) were written that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing ye might have life through his name." John xx. 31. << By grace are ye saved, through faith-not of works lest any man should boast." Eph. ii. 8, 9. "It is of faith that it might be by grace." Rom. iv. 16. If then these scripture testimonies be true, the assertion of the preacher must be false !

Again, let me examine this bold declaration under another view. Can a man believe that which he does not understand? Certainly not. Acts viii. 80,31. Matt.xiii. 23. Can


But may not a man profess with his mouth that which he does not believe in his heart?" Without doubt he may. Simon Magus professed to believe the preaching of Philip (Acts viii.) but he soon made it manifest that he neither understood nor believed all the doctrines of the gospel;" for had he done that, he would never have been so mad as to attempt purchasing the Holy Ghost for a sum of money. "A man may say he has faith"---Well," by their fruits ye shall know them." Let him shew by his works of what kind it is.

"He that saith he knoweth God and keepeth not his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him." 1 John ii. 4. Thus the apostles taught, and thus we believe. "Let God be true and every man (who contradicts him) a liar." See Eccles. v. 2.

POSTSCRIPT BY THE EDITOR. Christians by such unguarded expressions is The mischief done to the minds of simple incalculable. For in so far as they are received, their natural operation is to draw off the attention of the hearer from the great

facts and doctrines contained in the gospel,
as a precarious, uncertain, if not insufficient
ground of hope; and for what purpose? Why,
that they may look into their own minds, ex-

amine how they have been affected, and so
the ground
their own experience becomes
of their hope! This is to pervert the apostolie
gospel and injure the souls of men.

Theological Review.

Religious Liberty stated and enforced | of which the following are the titles.

on the principles of Scripture and common sense. In Six Essays, with Notes and an Appendix. BY THOMAS WILLIAMS. London. Williams and Son. Price 6s. bds. 8vo. pp. 228. 1816.

To review the writings of one who has himself been long in the practice of reviewing those of other men, is an enterprise of such difficulty and danger, that, had we not been privileged with stronger nerves than usually fall to the lot of editors, we should have been anxious to decline saying any thing of the volume before us and we are not quite sure that, even under existing circumstances, many of our readers will not be induced to say that in attempting it, we display far more fortitude than prudence. Mr. Williams," the learned layman," is a literary veteran, who has on many occasions appeared at the tribunal of the public, and obtained at their hands, the meed which is the just reward of his virtuous exertions to enlighten and inform his fellow creatures. In the work before us he has undertakeu to discuss a

subject of no ordinary magnitude; and it shall now be our business to report upon the manner in which he has acquitted himself in the discharge of it.

Essay I. The principles on which the Christian church is founded.-II. The original terms of church communion.-III. The duty of enquiry, and right of private judgment and free discussion.-IV. The spiritual nature of Christ's kingdom. — V. Nature and effects of intolerance and persecution.-VI. Historic sketch of the rise and progress of intolerance and persecution. These six Essays are followed by some account of the present state, and final overthrow of Popery; and an Appendix, containing some additional remarks on three of the Essays.

It struck us, on examining the titles of these Essays, that the work would have been rendered more complete had the author favoured us with a preliminary Essay on a topic, not unconnected with them, and of paramount importance to any that he has discussed. We beg leave to explain ourselves by an extract from our favourite poet :

66 there is a liberty, unsung
By poets, and by senators unprais'd,
Which monarchs cannot grant, nor all the

of Earth and Hell confed'rate take away:

A liberty, which persecution, fraud, Oppression, prisons, have no power to bind; "Tis liberty of heart deriv'd from heav'n

Which whose tastes can be enslav'd no more.

Bought with His blood, who gave it to man-

And seal'd with the same token. It is held
By charter, and that charter sanction'd sure
By th' unimpeachable and awful oath
And promise of a God. His other gifts
All bear the royal stamp, that speak them
And are august; but this transcends them all.”


There is something in the very sound of the word " Liberty," so congenial to the feelings of the human mind, that a species of enchantment seems to entwine itself around it, which has a powerful tendency to blind its votaries, and make them often to lose sight of the just distinction between liberty and licentiousness. Nor is this danger confined merely to what is termed civil or political liberty; without due cau-ciples and reasonings. tion we may as easily be led astray on the subject of "Religious Liberty," as on that which respects our exemption from political tyranny. We are, therefore, obliged to Mr. Williams for having undertaken to discuss the subject, and to instruct the public mind upon it. How far we agree with him in his views of it, will appear in the sequel.

But waving all further remarks on this point, we proceed to something like an analysis of the Essays, which we shall accompany with a few critical observations on the author's prin

The volume consists of six Essays,

ESSAY I. is entitled Fundamental

principles, or "the principles in which the Christian church is founded," and these according to our author, are "benevolence and love." In proof of this position he adduces Christ's new commandment to his disciples to "love one another." This he terms "the precept whereon the church is founded, and the criterion by which it must be known." p. 6, 7.



We fully agree with Mr. W. in all that | ii. 22-47. ch. viii. 5, 12, 35-39. ch. he advances on the importance of ix. 18-20. x. 34-48. xviii. 5-8. brotherly love and unity among the All Christ's real disciples are "of this disciples of Christ; and are persuad-truth." John xviii. 37. This truth ed that he is quite right in insisting they all "believe with the heart unto upon it as a leading (we do not say righteousness, and make confession the sole) test of discipleship. On of it with the mouth unto salvation." this subject he might, with perfect Rom. x. 9, 10. It is upon the open safety, have gone much further than confession of this truth that they are he has done. For instance, he might called to acknowledge one another as have insisted that there can be no brethren, 1 Pet. i. 22. and thus it bereligion where there is no love, 1 John comes the ground of their mutual iv. 7, 8, 16. And that to profess to love; for they "love' one another for love God, while we are destitute of the truth's sake, which dwelleth in love to our brethren, is to give the them and shall be with them for lie to our profession; for "he that ever." 2 John i. 2. loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen?" ver. 20. Yet after all, we doubt the correctness of the respectable Essayist, in saying that "the Christian church is founded in benevolence and love." It does not appear to us, that he hast kept his eye steadily fixed upon the scriptures in this statement, and the inaccuracy into which he has been betrayed, by his zeal for "religious liberty," deserves to be rectified; with a view to which, we offer to his consideration the following remarks.

1. When Simon Peter confessed Jesus of Nazareth to be "the Christ, the Son of the living God;" Jesus answered and said unto him, "blessed art thou, Simon Barjonas; for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven: And I say unto thee that thou art Peter; and upon this rock {namely, the truth which Peter had confessed concerning him as the true Messiah, the Son of the living God] I will build my church.” Matt. xvi. 16-18. If, then, we are prepared to admit the authority of Christ himself to be decisive on this point, it will follow that the truth which Peter confessed, is the foundation of the Christian church, and not "benevolence and love"-for these come in under a different consideration than that of the foundation of the church, as we shall presently shew.

2. No person was admitted to communion in the primitive churches, who did not confess the very same truth that Peter did. This confession entitled them to-baptism, and the latter to communion. For proof of this, we appeal to the whole of the Acts of the Apostles, and to all the Epistles to the churches. See Acts

3. Love to this truth and to each other for the truth's sake, is the bond of union among Christians, and it is the only effectual bond. Col. ii. 14. 1 Pet. iv.8. But then it is itself a fruit, or effect of faith-for "faith worketh by love." Gal. v. 6. 1 Tim. i. 5. But all this goes to prove, that though the exercise of brotherly love is essential to justify the truth of our discipleship, it is not the foundation on which the Christian church is built. It is of much importance to set professors right on this subject, since a great portion of the vile jargon which abounds in the religious world takes its rise from mistaken views of it.

ESSAY II. is intended to discuss "the original Terms of Church communion:" and on this subject he seems inclined to adopt the wild theory of Mr. Robert Hall, concerning which we have delivered our opinion at considerable length on a former occasion, (See vol. II. p. 174— 178.) and until we see something, at least plausible, advanced in opposition to our arguments, which has not yet been done, we think it quite unnecessary to waste our pages in proving that the scriptures are far from countenancing any such visionary plan of Church communion. Upon this subject, however, the Essayist is not very consistent with himself. At the commencement of the Essay, he says, " the terms of Communion are the essentials of Christianity: love to Christ and obedience to his commands form those essentials, and are the universal characteristics of his disciples, in the New Testament." p. 19. But, surely, in order to love Christ it is necessary to know his character, and what he hath done for us; nor is that all; it is also necessary to believe in him, John xvii. 3.

« PreviousContinue »