Part 4 (1/2)

3. As to matters of ritual, especially the use of liturgies which the Church of Scotland rejects.

4. As to the doctrines of sacramental grace and sacerdotal absolution, implied in the offices of the Anglican Church.

5. As to the whole system of discipline, Ecclesiastical Courts, &c.

6. As to certain points of Calvinistic theology.

The INDEPENDENTS differ from the Presbyterians chiefly in three points, namely:

1. As to ordination, and the liberty of preaching.

2. As to the political form and const.i.tution of church government, and the conditions of church communion.

3. As to the grounds and limits of religious liberty.

”Ordination alone,” say the Independents, ”without the precedent consent of the Church by those who formerly have been advanced by virtue of that power they have received by their ordination, doth not const.i.tute any person a church officer, or communicate office power unto him.” The Presbyterians on the other hand deny that the mere invitation and choice of the people could confer the pastoral office, or that it was even a pre-requisite. The Independents seem to have identified the ministerial function with the pastoral office; and argued that it was absurd to ordain an officer without a province to exercise the office in. Their opponents viewed the Christian ministry more as an order invested with certain inherent powers; a faculty or profession endowed with peculiar privileges, the admission into which required to be jealously guarded; and this power and authority they conceive could be transmitted by those of the order. All approved candidates for the ministerial office among the Presbyterians, are ordained without reference to any local change; among the Independents no probationer is ordained till he has been appointed to the pastoral office. The first Independent or Congregational Church in England was established by a Mr. Jacob, A.D.

1616, though it is a.s.serted that a Mr. Robinson was the founder of this sect, of which Dr. John Owen, Dr. Isaac Watts, Dr. Doddridge, and Job Orton were members.

The following extracts are from the discourses of Robert Hall, who, though a Baptist, dissented from most of his brethren on the subject of strict communion. He was a preacher both of Baptist and Independent congregations, but he did not hesitate to avow that ”he had more fellows.h.i.+p of feeling for an Independent or a Presbyterian than for a close communion Baptist.” His system of theological tenets was on the model of what has come to be denominated ”Moderate Calvinism.” With regard to the distinctive Calvinistic doctrine of Predestination, ”I cannot,” says his biographer, ”answer for the precise terms in which he would have stated it, but I presume he would have accepted those employed by the Church of England. In preaching he very rarely made any express reference to that doctrine.”

”Jesus Christ did not come, let it be remembered, to establish a mere external morality, that his followers might be screened from human laws and human justice, for human laws will take care of this. The holy inst.i.tution of Christianity has a n.o.bler object, that of purifying our hearts and regulating our behaviour by the love of G.o.d. In the most practical accounts of the proceedings of the last day given in the Scriptures, the excellency which is represented as being a criterion and distinguis.h.i.+ng feature of the disciple of Christ, and which He will acknowledge, is: Christian benevolence-love to man manifested in the relief of the poor. The Apostle St. John has given us a most sublime description of the love of G.o.d, when he says, 'G.o.d is love;' love is not so much an attribute of His nature as His _very essence_; the spirit of Himself. Christian benevolence is not only the 'image of G.o.d,' but is peculiarly an imitation of Christ.” ”I do not ask, my brethren, what particular virtue you have, but _how much are you under the influence of Him_? for just so much virtue we have, as we have of His spirit and character.” ”Our Saviour places the acceptance of men, not upon their dispositions, but upon their actions; upon what _they have done_, not upon what they have _merely believed_ or _felt_, or in any undefined state of mind.”-”I am persuaded that the cause of the ruin of professing Christians does not arise so much from a mistake of the doctrines of Christianity as from a low idea of Christian morals; in abstaining from certain crimes and disorders through fear of the loss of character and of punishment, without reflecting on the spirit of that holy religion which we profess.”-”Christ went about doing good, not as an _occasional_ exercise, but as his _employment_; it was the one thing which he did.

Though possessed of infinite power, he never employed it in resenting or retaliating an injury. He was pre-eminently devout. His was an active life; it was not the life of a solitary monk. That devotion which terminates in itself is a luxury which sometimes perverts the principles of benevolence to a pernicious purpose. Let us rather recede from being called Christians than forget the great symbol of our profession, love to one another.”

[Picture: Decorative header]

LETTER VIII.

PARTICULAR BAPTISTS, SUB AND SUPRALAPSARIANS, SANDEMANIANS.

Having now given some account of the princ.i.p.al Calvinistic sects, I shall conclude by mentioning a few of those less numerous societies, which, whilst agreeing in the peculiar doctrines of Calvin, differ upon other points. THE PARTICULAR BAPTISTS, agreeing with the General Baptists on most other practices and doctrines, differ from them on this. The separation took place in the year 1616, when a controversy on the subject of infant baptism having arisen among the Baptists, one portion calling itself the ”Independent Congregation” seceded, embraced the Calvinistic doctrine, and became the first Particular Baptists: others, who were in general attached to the opinions of Calvin, concerning the decrees of G.o.d and Divine Grace, were not entirely agreed concerning the manner of explaining the doctrine of the Divine decrees. The greater part believed that G.o.d only _permitted_ the first man to fall into transgression, without particularly predetermining his fall: these were termed SUBLAPSARIANS. But others again maintained that ”G.o.d in order to exercise and display his justice and his free mercy, had decreed from all eternity the transgression of Adam, and so ordered the course of events, that our first parents could not possibly avoid their fall. These were termed SUPRALAPSARIANS.

There is a modern sect that originated in Scotland about 1728, termed Gla.s.sites, from its founder Mr. John Gla.s.s, who was expelled by the Synod from the Church of Scotland, for maintaining that ”the kingdom of Christ was not of this world.” His adherents then formed themselves into churches, conformable in their inst.i.tution and discipline to what they apprehended to be the plan of the first churches recorded in the New Testament. Soon after the year 1755, Mr. John Sandeman (an elder in one of these congregations in Scotland) attempted to prove that ”Faith is neither more nor less than a simple a.s.sent to the Divine testimony, concerning Jesus Christ delivered for the offences of men and raised again for their justification, as recorded in the New Testament.” He also mentioned that the word _Faith_ or _Belief_, is constantly used by the Apostles to signify what is denoted by it in common conversation, i.e. a persuasion of the truth of any proposition, and that there is no difference between believing any common testimony, and believing the apostolic testimony, except that which results from the testimony itself, and the Divine authority on which it rests. This led to controversy among the Calvinists and Sandemanians, concerning the nature of justifying faith; and the latter formed themselves into a separate sect.

They administer the sacrament of the Lord's supper weekly, and hold ”love feasts,” of which every member is not only allowed but required to partake, and which consists of their dining together at each other's houses, in the interval between the morning and afternoon service. They interpret literally the precept respecting the ”kiss of charity,” which they use on the admission of a new member, as well as on other occasions, when they deem it necessary or proper: they make a weekly collection before the sacrament of the Lord's supper; use mutual exhortation; abstain from blood and things strangled; wash each other's feet; hold that every one is to consider all that he possesses to be liable to the calls of the poor and the church, and that it is unlawful to ”lay up treasure upon earth,” by setting them apart for any future use. They allow of public and private diversions, so far as they are not connected with circ.u.mstances really sinful; but apprehending a lot to be sacred, they disapprove of lotteries, playing at cards, dice, &c. They maintain the necessity of a plurality of elders, pastors, or bishops in each church, and the necessity of the presence of two elders in every act of discipline, and at the administration of the Lord's supper. Second marriages disqualify for the office of elder. The elders are ordained by prayer and fasting, imposition of hands, and giving the ”right hand of fellows.h.i.+p.” In their discipline they are strict and severe, and in every transaction esteem unanimity to be absolutely necessary.

[Picture: Decorative header]

LETTER IX.

CALVINISTIC METHODISTS. EVANGELICAL OR SERIOUS CHRISTIANS.

I noticed the name of George Whitfield when speaking of Wesley and his followers, for during a time they acted in unison; Whitfield, however, soon embraced the Calvinistic tenets, and then the friends separated with much of unkindly feeling. Wesley held the doctrines of Calvin in abhorrence, as altogether unchristian and unfounded in Scripture. ”I defy you to say so hard a thing of the Devil,” said he with characteristic earnestness, when speaking of the notion that G.o.d could arbitrarily create any for eternal reprobation. This separation between the leaders soon extended to their congregations, and from that time Calvinistic and Wesleyan Methodists became distinct sects, differing, however, but little on any other point, excepting in the greater tendency to enthusiasm among the followers of Whitfield.

”Wesley and Whitfield,” says Mr. Sidney in his life of Rowland Hill, ”were men of widely different characters, both in respect to their natural dispositions as well as the discipline of their minds; and painful frailties were visible in the midst of their true greatness. An ambitious love of power was evidently the besetting weakness of John Wesley; aspiration to the _honours_ when he had no prospect of the _suffering_ of martyrdom, was that of Whitfield.” In his letters to Rowland Hill, it is evident how he courted and enjoyed persecution; and whenever ”_the fire_ (to use his own expression) was kindled in the country;” he was not satisfied unless ”honoured” by being scorched a little in its flame. This was a wrong spirit, and did injury to his own mind, and to his followers, by encouraging a morose and morbid carriage towards the world, giving needless offence, and provoking animosity in those who might have been attracted and endeared to truth by the lovely graces of pure Christianity.”

At the time when he, and his early friends the Wesleys began their ministry, the piety of all cla.s.ses was at a very low ebb. The earnestness of these men gave a new impulse to religious feeling, and after a time a considerable number of other episcopally ordained ministers of the church, together with a portion of the laity, became influenced by the same sentiments. Without seceding, they formed a party in the church, leaning to Calvinism to the extent they thought justified by the x.x.xIX Articles; and this party soon became designated by several distinguis.h.i.+ng terms. They called themselves _Evangelical_ first, afterwards when that became a cant term of misapplied reproach, they took the t.i.tle of _Serious_ Christians, and by others were called _Low Church_, and _Methodistical_. Besides distinguis.h.i.+ng themselves by an especial name, they avoided public amus.e.m.e.nts, used a peculiar phraseology, and seemed to delight in wearing their religion externally in the sight of all men, thinking perhaps to reform the thoughtless by the example of their greater strictness. But herein, in my opinion, they made a net for their own feet, for that very aspiration after greater exaltation which is implanted in us as a spur to strive after glory and immortality, is soon by mismanagement perverted into a love of earthly distinction. Hence comes ambition; but the ambition for worldly honours has in it this alleviation, that the man who toils after a t.i.tle or a fortune, knows that he is, after all, seeking but a mean object; and if ever his mind is awakened at all to a sense of the world to come, the soul springs back to its true ambition, and launches into the career natural to it: but the man who seeks to be distinguished among his brethren for superior holiness, and wears it externally, that it may be seen and honoured by men, blinds his better nature, and fetters it to earth by chains forged in heaven; he sees not that he is ambitious; he is not aware that while seeking, as he imagines, to honour G.o.d in his life, he is enjoying at his heart's core the respectful homage of men; and whilst attending to his outward deportment, and making a display even of his humility, he too frequently leaves the inner heart unchastened. Our Saviour knew the frailties of man, and his injunction that our religion should chiefly be manifested by our benevolent feelings towards our fellow creatures, while the communing with G.o.d should be carried on in silence and secrecy, is the only safe guide in these matters.

I have no doubt that there are many of the Low Church party, whose conscientiousness sets at defiance the dangers of the system they have adopted: indeed my own private friends.h.i.+ps warrant me in saying so: but it is not well to lead others into dangerous paths where our own skill indeed may enable us to walk safely, but where the hindmost, whom we are not leading by the hand, are in continual hazard of deviating from the true course; and therefore whilst honouring individual virtues, I continue to consider the whole system erroneous: one whose tendency is to create spiritual pride, and lower the standard of Christian benevolence by restricting to a party that fellows.h.i.+p which should be universal. It does but subst.i.tute the excitement of the crowded church where a popular preacher charms with all the graces of rhetoric, of the committee room, of the speakers at Exeter Hall, for the ball room and the theatre; with this difference, that in the first case the instinct which makes the mind seek this excitement, is overlooked; the man believes himself performing a meritorious action, and looks with some contempt on his weaker brethren, who cannot exist without worldly amus.e.m.e.nts; on the other he knows what he is about, and if he be well-intentioned, guards against excess. It would be wiser therefore to acknowledge the instinct; not bad in itself, for G.o.d implanted it, and if it be denied a due indulgence, the mind sinks into hopeless imbecility; and not to blame those who seek other, but innocent means of gratifying it. {122a}