Part 1 (1/2)
Christian Sects in the Nineteenth Century.
by Caroline Frances Cornwallis.
”Heaven and h.e.l.l are not more distant, than the benevolent spirit of the Gospel, and the malignant spirit of party. The most impious wars ever made were called-'Holy Wars.'”
LYTTLETON.
”Let those ill-invented terms whereby we have been distinguished from each other be swallowed up in that name which will lead us hand in hand to heaven-the name of CHRISTIAN.”
BISHOP RYDER.
[Picture: Decorative header]
The following letters grew out of a conversation between one of the editors of the ”Small Books,” and a lady of his acquaintance; and as there are probably many who have felt the want of the information they contain, it has been thought that by publis.h.i.+ng them in a collected form they may be useful. The views of the writer are sufficiently explained in the letters themselves. All lament the small sum of Christian charity to be found among religionists in general, but few when they begin to write have kept clear of a severity of comment which but prolongs differences. The writer, himself a member of the Church of England, is anxious to show that it is possible to be attached to one persuasion without imputing either folly or ill intention to others; and it is with a view of promoting the loving fellows.h.i.+p of all whom G.o.d disdains not to create and support, that this slight sketch is given to the world.
[Picture: Decorative graphic]
LETTER I.
You some time ago requested me to give you the result of my inquiries into the tenets of the different religious sects which I had been acquainted with; and respecting which we had at different times conversed. In the time which has since elapsed I have been endeavouring, both to ascertain them more completely, and to compare them with what I conceive to be the true spirit of Christianity; but the subject has so grown as I proceeded, that even now I can only give you a very short, and I fear, in some cases, an imperfect notion of them. Yet the subject is one of deep interest; and as I feel convinced that if we looked a little closer into the differences between the established church and those who separate from it, both parties would find them smaller and less important than they imagine, and that Christian charity would be increased by the examination, I do not shrink from the task however inadequately I may execute it.
I propose therefore to show you by extracts from the works of the princ.i.p.al writers among the different religious sects, how they all agree in most of the fundamental doctrines of Christianity; at the same time that I point out the evil consequences which I conceive would ensue were some of their tenets _fully carried out_ into practice: and also to state wherein their peculiar opinions appear to me to be opposed to ”the truth as it is in Christ Jesus,” so far as to prevent me from adopting them; though I can fully believe that those who hold these opinions in the abstract, may, notwithstanding, be excellent practical Christians.
Firmly attached as I am to the Church of England, whose form of wors.h.i.+p (allowing for the imperfections which naturally cling to all human inst.i.tutions), I consider preferable to any other; I can still see much to admire in other persuasions and other ceremonies, mixed up, though it be, with some imperfections and error; and my love to the established church does not blind me to some matters which might be better otherwise, and which I shall point out as I proceed.
”Of all the Christian graces,” says a quaint writer, ”zeal is the most apt to turn sour;” and the observation is no less true than it is sad, for men too seldom remember that they must add to their faith knowledge, and that both are of no avail without the crowning gift of charity, {3} or in other words, brotherly love for all mankind. The real Christian, it seems to me, should imitate the liberality of St. Paul, who, after having been bred up in the habits of the ”strictest sect” of the Jews, scrupled not to quit all his former prejudices, in order to preach Christ to the Gentiles, without disgusting them by ceremonies which were no fundamental part of the religion he taught, and was content to become ”as a Jew, that he might gain the Jews, and to them that were without law, to become as without law (being not without law to G.o.d), that he might by all means save some.” {4}
We are too apt to hold each other accountable for all the consequences which can be logically deduced from an opinion, however extreme they may be: and then having persuaded ourselves that those abstract tenets which, by straining them to an extreme point, _may_ have an evil effect, _must_ have an evil effect on all who profess them,-we avoid those who differ from us on religious subjects, because we have a.s.sumed that they are actually immoral by virtue of their opinions; and thus we miss the opportunity of convincing ourselves of our mistake by a more intimate knowledge of their lives. ”By their fruits ye shall know them,” says our Lord; but we seldom approach them closely enough to see the fruits.
If we would be content to sink minor differences, and be satisfied that ”in every nation he that feareth G.o.d and worketh righteousness is accepted with him,” we should soon meet on better terms; for we do not hold at a distance from those on earth whom we expect to meet in heaven; and thanks be to G.o.d, there is no religious persuasion that cannot boast of many such as Cornelius.
St. Paul recommends to the churches that they be ”kindly affectioned one towards another, in honour preferring one another:” {5a} ”by this shall men know that ye are my disciples,” says our Great Exemplar, ”if ye have love one to another;” but alas! if we contemplate what is called the Christian world, where shall we find Christ's _true_ disciples? Grievous indeed it is, as has been well observed, that that religion, which ”should most correct and sweeten men's spirits, sours and sharpens them the most.” But surely ”_we_ have not so learned Christ.” Let us for a moment contemplate His conduct towards those who differed from him in religious opinions; his compa.s.sion towards them; his meek reproofs not only to the Sadducees and the Samaritans, but even to the more hardened; {5b} and then let us turn to our own hearts and confess with shame that we have fallen miserably short of that charity without which ”whosoever liveth is counted dead before G.o.d.”
So clear is the command to exercise universal benevolence, that whatever obscurity there may be in other parts of Scripture, however men, even wise ones, may differ as to the real signification of certain pa.s.sages in the Bible, _here_ at least there can be no cavilling. It is intelligible to the most ignorant as well as the most learned, so that ”the wayfaring man, though a fool, shall not err therein.”
Archbishop Tillotson relates of Mr. Gouge, an eminent nonconformist, that he allowed men to differ from him in opinions that were ”_very dear_ to him;” and provided men did but ”fear G.o.d and work righteousness,” he loved them heartily, how distant soever from him in judgment about things less necessary: ”in all which,” observes the Archbishop, ”he is very worthy to be a pattern to men of all persuasions.” ”I abhor two principles in religion,” says William Penn in a letter to the same archbishop, ”and pity them that own them. The first is obedience upon authority without conviction; and the other, destroying them that differ from me for G.o.d's sake: such a religion is without judgment, though not without truth. Union is best, if right; if not, charity.”
I have given the opinion of these two eminent men of different persuasions, partly to show that the evil I complain of is one of long standing; partly to justify my own opinion as to the remedy; namely, the paying _more_ attention to the fundamental doctrines of Christianity; _less_, to those minor differences which, from the very obscurity of the texts on which they are founded, come more frequently under discussion, and thus, from a mental operation somewhat a.n.a.logous to that of the laws of perspective, seem large and important because they are close under our eyes, though they are in fact minute in comparison with those which we have not been examining so closely. Thus men inadvertently reverse the order of things, and zeal for the maintenance of peculiar tenets too often supersedes the far more important virtue of Christian benevolence, to the scandal of all good Christians and the mockery of unbelievers.
The Quakers, in their address to James II. on his accession, told him that they understood he was no more of the established religion than themselves. ”We therefore hope,” said they, ”that thou wilt allow us that liberty which thou takest thyself:” and it would be well if we took a hint from this, and reflected that we differ as much from other sects as they do from us, {8} and that the greatest heresy is, as a Christian Father declared it to be long ago-”a wicked life.”
It is, however, needful to distinguish between the Christian spirit of forbearance towards those who differ from us in religious opinions, which Christ and his apostles so strongly inculcate, and the indolent lat.i.tudinarianism which induces many to declare that ”a man cannot help his belief,” that ”sincerity is everything,” that ”all religious sects are alike,” &c.: positions which, as you well observed on one occasion, ought rather to be reversed; for when men are _not_ sincere, all sects certainly _are_ alike: for then it is but a lip service which will never influence the life, and it matters not what opinion is professed; it will be equally powerless.
Sincere belief must be the consequence of proof, without which we cannot believe truly; with it, we must. If then we content ourselves with the mere _ipse dixit_ of others without seeking proof, our belief is the result of indolence, and for that indolence we shall be accountable when we are called on to give an account of the talent committed to our charge, if error has been consequent upon it. He, on the contrary, whose education or whose means have not put proof within his reach, although he may wish earnestly for it, _may_ be wrong in understanding, but he will never be wrong in heart: his tenets may be wrong, but his life will be right. It behoves us therefore to be cautious how we pa.s.s sentence on one another in religious matters, since, as has been well observed, we are ourselves amenable to a tribunal where uncharitable conduct towards others, will bring down a just and heavy sentence on ourselves. We are not to erect ourselves into judges of other men's consciences, {10} but leave them to the judgment and disposal of ONE who alone can see into the heart of men, and alone can ascertain the real nature and ultimate consequence of all questions which admit of ”doubtful disputation.”