Part 4 (1/2)
”But,” it will be said, ”the Gospels are not the only parts of Scripture whence the nature of the Eucharist e is employed by St Paul in reference to it, which cannot be understood of aon the worthy or unworthy participation in the rite Does he not even say, that athe Lord's body'?”
The passage whence these words are cited certainly throws great light on the institution of which we treat; but there eneral course of the Apostle's reasoning before it can be ument for the mystical character of the rite It would appear that the Corinthian church was in the habit of celebrating the Lord's Supper in a hich, even if it had never been disgraced by any indecoruularity Thehis own supper, of such quantity and quality as his opulence or poverty ht allow To this the Apostle does not object, but apparently considers it a part of the established arrangement But these Christians were divided into factions, and had not learned the true uniting spirit of their faith; nor do they seem to have acquired that sobriety of habit and sanctity of ht to have induced When they entered the place of roups and parties, class apart froan its separatein luxury and excess, others with scarce thethe commemoration at all; and, infamous to tell, the blessed Supper of the Lord was sunk into a tavern ross and habitual had the abuse become, that the excesses had affected the health and life of these guilty and unworthy partakers They had made no distinction between the Communion and an ordinary repast, had lost all perception of the , had not discriminated or ”discerned the Lord's body”; and so they had eaten and drunk judglish Version) to the them, and many even slept Well would it be, if they would look on this as a chastening of the Lord; in which case theycast out of the Church, and driven to take their chance with the unbelieving and heathen world ”When we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world”
In order to remedy all this corruption, St Paul reminds them, that to eat and drink under the same roof, in the church, does not constitute proper Communion; that, to this end, they must not break up into sections, and retain their property in the food, but all participate seriously together He directs that an absolute separation shall be er and thirst, and those for observing this co carefully theelse He refers the meal of Christ before his betrayal; and by this example, as a criterion, he would have every man examine himself, and after that pattern eat of the bread and drink of the cup Hence it appears,--
That the unworthy partaker was the riotous Corinthian, who ar ht on themselves, was sickliness, weakness, and premature but natural death:
That the self-examination which the Apostle recommends to the co the rite with the original model of the last Supper:
That in the Corinthian church there was no Priest, or officiating dispenser of the elements; and that St Paul did not contemplate or recommend the appointment of any such person
The Lord's Supper, then, I conclude, was and is a si to Unitarian views, the death on the crossfeatures of our Lord's history,--more even than the death of many a noble martyr, who has sealed his testimony to truth by like self-sacrifice”? The ansill be found at length in the Lecture on the Atonement, where the Scriptural conceptions of Christ's death are expounded in detail Meanwhile, it is sufficient to recall an idea, which hasthis course; that, if Jesus had taken up his Messianic poithout death, he would have remained a Hebrew, and been limited to the people amid whom he was born He quitted his mortal personality, he left this fleshly tabernacle of existence, and becaht be destroyed, and all n It was the cross that opened to the nations the blessed ways of life, and put us all in relations, not of law, but of love, to him and God
Hence the memorial of his death celebrates the universality and spirituality of the Gospel; declares the brotherhood of men, the fatherhood of providence, the personal affinity of every soul with God That is no empty rite which overfloith these conceptions
Christianity, then, I ether coalesces with the prophetic idea of religion, and repudiates the sacerdotal Christ hiht down God to this our life, and left his spirit amid its scenes The Apostles were prophets; they carried that spirit abroad, revealing everywhere to men the sanctity of their nature, and the proxi to admit an apostolic succession, never yet extinct, and never uished But then it is by no ilorious race of prophets; the genealogy of great and Christian souls, through whoated the birth to courage, truth developing truth, and love ever nurturing love, so long as one good and noble spirit shall act upon another Luther surely was the child of Paul; and what a noble offspring has risen to manhood from Luther's soul, whom to enumerate were to tell the best triumphs of the modern world These are Christ's true ambassadors; and never did he enuine er, wherever, in the Church or in the world, there toils any one of the real prophets of our race; any one who can create the good and great in other souls, whether by truth of word or deed, by the inspiration of genuine speech, or the better power of a life merciful and holy
And here, ht my Lecture close, were it not that we are assembled now to terminate this controversy; and that a few remarks in reference to its whole course and spirit seeression upon the principles of Unitarian Christianity was prompted by no unworthy motive, individual or political, but by a zeal, Christian so far as its spirit is disinterested, and unchristian only so far as it is exclusive, has never been doubted or denied by my brother ministers or myself That much personal consideration and courtesy have been evinced towards us during the controversy, it is so grateful to us to acknowledge, that we ical obstructions in the way of that e which softens the prejudices and corrects the errors of the closet From such errors, the lot of our fallible nature, we are deeply aware that we cannot be exempt, and profoundly wish that, by others' aid or by our oe could discover them Meanwhile, we do not feel that our opponents have been successful in the offer which they have made, of help towards this end They are too little acquainted with our history and character, and have far too great a horror of us, to succeed in a design de rather the benevolence of sympathy and trust than that of antipathy and fear Hence have arisen certain coainst our systeain and again in the Christ Church Lectures, and scarcely noticed in our own, clai observation or t
1 We are said to be infidels in disguise, and our syste fast towards utter unbelief At all events, it is said we reat advances that way
It is by no e on a ind of declareatest possible distance My friend who delivered the first Lecture noticed it in a far different spirit; and in a discussion where truth and wisdom had any chance, his reply would have prevented any recurrence to the statement Let me try to imitate him in the testimony which I desire to add upon this point
Every one, I presu, _an infidel_ Departure from any prevalent and established ideas is inevitably an approach to infidelity; the extent of the departure, not the reasonableness or propriety of it, is the sole measure of the nearness of that approach; which, however wise and sober, when estimated by a true and independent criterion, will appear, to persons strongly possessed by the ascendant notions, nothing less than alare popular creed of the day is the mental standard, from which the stadia are inary place, lodged somewhere within chaos, called utter unbelief
Christianity at first was blank infidelity; and disciples, being of course the atheists of their day, were thought a fit prey for the wild beasts of the aain, is unbelief with respect to it; and to those who hold its authority, it is the denial of an essential It is too evident to need proof, that the average popular belief cannot be assumed, by any considerate person, as a standard of truth To ainst any class of ainst the to call in the passions of the e on the controversies of the feill condescend to enforce the charge
But only observe how, in the present instance, the ion we discern, ether, two constituent portions: certain _peculiar_ doctrines which characterize the common Orthodoxy; and certain _universal_ Christian truths re, when these are subtracted The infidel throay both of these; we throay the forree with hirounds_ do we severally justify this rejection? In answer to this question, compare the vieith respect both to the _authority_ and to the _interpretation_ of Scripture, held by the three parties, the Trinitarian, the Unbeliever, the Unitarian The Unbeliever does not usually find fault with the Orthodox _interpretation_ of the Bible, but allows it to pass, as probably the real ether denies the divine character and authority of the whole religion; he therefore _agrees_ with the Trinitarian respecting interpretation, disagrees with hiain, admits the divine character of Christianity, but understands it differently frorees_ with the Orthodox on the authority, _disagrees_ respecting interpretation It follows, that with the Unbeliever he agrees _in neither_, and is therefore farther froiven this explanation froical truth I have no desire to join in the outcry against even the deliberate unbeliever in the Gospel, as if heand trusting Christianity y, policy, and law inflict on the many ith undeniable exercise of conscientiousness and patience of research, are yet unable to satisfy the its evidence
The very word ”_infidel_,” iment, but bad ht to be repudiated by every generous disputant The more deeply we trust Christianity, the uard of passions, willing to do for it precisely the services which they arest iments of our _honesty_, ant of _anxiety_ about spiritual truth; and the following justification of the charge was offered: ”The word of God has informed us, that they who seek the truth shall find it; that they who ask for holy wisdom shall receive it; but it must be a _really anxious inquiry_,--a heart-felt desire for the blessing 'If thou seekest her as silver, and searchest for her as for hid treasures, then shalt thou understand the fear of the Lord, and find the knowledge of God' Such proive the blessing to the _sincere_, _anxious_ inquirer But the two qualities norance and spiritual torpor; but let the full desire for God's favor, his pardoningup in the heart, and we may rest assured that the desire will soon be acco, then, the sincerity of Unitarians, we doubt their anxiety, for we are well persuaded from God's promises, that, if they possessed both, they would be delivered froe of the truth”[11]
The praise of our ”_sincerity_,” conveyed in these bland sentences, we are anxious to decline: not that we undervalue the quality; but because we find, on near inspection, that it has all been emptied out of the word before its presentation, and the term comes to us hollow and worthless It affords a speciive any credit to heretics: many phrases of approbation they freely apply to us; but they take care to draw off the wholefirst We must reject these ”Greek presents”; and we are concerned that any Christian divine can so torture and desecrate the naement and injury This play ords, which every conscience should hold sacred, and every lip pronounce with reverence,--this careless and un application of them in discourse,--indicates a loose adhesion to the ned astonishrief What, let me ask, can be the ”_sincerity_” of an inquirer, who is not ”_anxious_” _about the truth_? How can _he_ be ”_sincerely_” persuaded that he sees, who voluntarily shuts his eyes? Unless this word is to be degraded into a synonyme for indolence and self-complacency, no professed seeker of truth must have the praise of sincerity, who does not abandon all worshi+p of his own state of mind as already perfect, who is not ready to listen to every calratitude the labor of reaching neledge,--to maintain his faith and his profession in scrupulous accordance with his perception of evidence; and, at anyfroht, with a matin hymn upon his lips for his new birth from darkness and from sleep The earnestness implied in this state of mind is perhaps not precisely the same as that hich our Trinitarian opponents seem to be familiar
The ”anxiety” which they appear to feel for the state of belief: the ”anxiety” which they feel for us is, that we should have it We are to hold ourselves ready for a change; they are not to be expected to desire it If a doubt of _our opinions_ should occur _to us_, we are to foster it carefully, and follow it out as a beckoning of the Holy Spirit: if a doubt of _their sentiments_ should occur _to theht sent of Satan to teain, ”has been to beget a deep spirit of inquiry”;[12] and so has ours, I would reply: only you and we have severally prosecuted this aim in different ways We have personally listened, and personally inquired, and earnestly recommended all whom our influence could reach, to do the sa one of these series of Lectures that will not exhibit the other by its side You have entered this controversy, evidently strange to our literature and history; and any deficiency in such reading before, has not been compensated by anxiety to listen now Your people have been warned against us, and are taught to regard the study of our publications as blasphemy at second hand; and were they really so siet a deep spirit of inquiry,” and plunge into the investigation of Unitarian authors, and judge for themselves of Unitarian worshi+p, they would speedily hear the word of recall, and discover that they were practically disappointing the whole object of this controversy
Having said thus e in the Lecturer's disparaging estimate of Unitarian ”anxiety,” we _ which it involves It presents us with the standing fallacy of intolerance, which is sufficiently rebuked by being simply exhibited Our opponents reason thus:--
God will not permit the really anxious fatally to err: The Unitarians _do_ fatally err: Therefore, The Unitarians are not really anxious
Now it is clear that we must conceive our opponents to be no less mistaken than they suppose us to be They are as far from us, as we from them; and from either point, taken as a standard, the erly assent to the principle of the Lecturer's first premise, that God will never let the truly anxious fatally , in the nature of the case, to prevent our turning this saainst our opponents Yet we should shrink, with severe self-reproach, fro thee our reasoning thus:--
God will not permit the really anxious fatally to err: The Trinitarians show themselves to be really anxious: Therefore, The Trinitarians do not fatally err
Our opponents are ht, than that their neighbors' conscience is in earnest They sacrifice other men's characters to their own self-confidence: ould rather distrust our self-confidence, and rely on the visible signs of a good and careful mind We honor other men's hearts, rather than our own heads How can it be just, to reement between an opponent's opinion and our own the criterion of his proper conduct of the inquiry? Every ainst hiainst his brother