Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

by searching can find out God?'" If again you venture to appeal to human reason, and ask this man of mystery how it is possible that two or three can be one; he stands aghast at your impious question, and shudders at the bare thought of seeing reason, carnal reason, dragged within the pale of the sacred controversy, and quickly replies, by saying, "It is enough for me that it is revealed; I take the words as I find them, without setting up my frail corrupted reason against the oracles of God." But, my good friend, allow me to say, that if you take the preceding texts literally as you find them, I see no reason why you should not, take the following passages in a literal sense also. Paul says in precisely the same language, that the planter and waterer are one. And why should not the following also be taken as it stands: "This is my body;" and "except ye eat the flesh of the Son of Man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you"? I perceive now, says the theologian, the defender of the doctrine of the Trinity, who is by this time become a little angry, that you are a decided Socinian; and as a Socinian, a heretic of the worst class, condemned to everlasting punishment for denying the Lord that bought him: I do not think it to be consistent with the holy character of my orthodoxy to have any further conversation with you, lest I also should become contaminated by the breath of your nostrils.

G. F.

Porson and Wakefield on Gibbon's Attack on Christianity.

SIR,

19

Dec. 7, 1817. OBSERVE in the Preface of the late Professor Porson's "Letters to Archdeacon Travis," now a scarce book, the following strictures on Mr. Gibbon's History, chiefly with reference to the indecencies in which that popular historian too often indulged himself. As the opinions of an acute observer, and one never accused of being righteous over much, these remarks may be worthy of more general circulation, especially as they are connected with the learned Professor's judgment on the literary execution of the History. Having refuted a weak objection which might be offered against him, for writing on the same side with an

[blocks in formation]

allow that Mr. Gibbon's History is one of "An impartial judge, I think, must the ablest performances of its kind that has ever appeared. His industry is indefatigable; his accuracy scrupulous; his reading, which indeed is sometimes ostentatiously displayed, immense; his attention always awake; his memory retentive; his style emphatic and expressive; his periods harmonious. His reflections are often just and profound; he pleads eloquently for the rights of mankind and the duty of tole. ration; nor does his humanity ever slumber, unless when women are ravished, (Ch. lvii. Note 54,) or the Christians persecuted (Ch. xvi.).

"Mr. Gibbon shews, it is true, so strong a dislike to Christianity, as visibly disqualifies him for that society of which he has created Ammianus Marcelliaus president. I confess that I see nothing wrong in Mr. Gibbon's attack on Christianity. It proceeded, I doubt not, from the purest blame him for carrying on the attack in and most virtuous motive. We can only an insidious manner and with improper weapons. He often makes, when he cannot readily find, an occasion to insult our religion; which he hates so cordially, that he might seem to revenge some personal injury. Such is his eagerness in the cause, that he stoops to the most despicable pun, or to the most awkward perversion of language, for the pleasure of turning the Scripture into ribaldry, or of calling Jesus an impostor. (Ch. lix. Note 32, and Ch. xi. Note 63.)

"Though his style is in general correct and elegant, he sometimes draws out the thread of his verbosity finer than the staple of his argument. (Shakspeare.) In endeavouring to avoid vulgar terms, he too frequently dignifies trifles, and clothes common thoughts in a splendid dress, that would be rich enough for the noblest ideas. In short, we are too often reminded of that great man, Mr. Prig, the auctioneer, whose manner was so inimitably fine, that he had as much to say upon a ribbon as a Raphael. -(Foote.)

Sometimes in his anxiety to vary his phrase, he becomes obscure; and instead of calling his personages by their names, defines them by their birth, alliance, office or other circumstances of their history. Thus an honest gentleman is often described by a circumlocution, lest the same word should be twice repeated in the same page. Sometimes, in his attempts at elesometimes of sense. (Ch. xlvii. near Note gance, he loses sight of English, and 19, and Ch. 1. near Note 153.)

"Aless pardonable fault is that rage for indecency which pervades the whole work,

but especially the last volumes. And, to the honour of his consistency, this is the same man who is so prudish that he dares not call Belisarius a cuckold, because it is too bad a word for a decent historian to use. If the history were anonymous, I should guess, that these disgraceful obscenities were written by some debauchee, who having, from age or accident or excess, survived the practice of lust, still indulged himself in the luxury of speculation; and exposed the impotent imbecility, after he had lost the vigour of the passions. (Junius.)

But these few faults make no considerable abatement in my general esteem. Notwithstanding all its particular defects, I greatly admire the whole; as I should admire a beautiful face, though it were tarnished with a few freckles; or, as I should admire an elegant person and address, though they were blemished with a little affectation."

How the learned Professor, while, upon such good authority, he placed thus low Mr. Gibbon's moral character, could yet so confidently attribute his "attack on Christianity" to "the purest and most virtuous motive," I am at a loss to understand. Christians should be cautious of attributing to an opposite motive, even "a cordial hatred of our religion." Yet, if an author seek to undermine that religion by arts unworthy of fair contention, and at the same time use every occasion to corrupt the purity it inculcates, can it be uncandid to suspect that he hateth the light, and cometh not to the light lest his deeds should be discovered?

Another scholar, also united to the great majority, once took occasion to animadvert with less complaisance on Mr. Gibbon and his History. I refer to Mr. Wakefield's “New Translation of those parts only of the New Testament which are wrongly translated in our Common Version." 8vo. 1789. At the close of his Preface, he speaks of the Historian of the Decline and Fall

in very disparaging terms. That I may do Mr. W. no injustice, I quote the whole paragraph.

"In the present publication a new turn is given to several capital passages in St. John's Gospel, which were before either absurd or unintelligible. Indeed, this last review of the New Testament has given additional strength, not only to my conviction of the truth of Christianity, but to my persuasion of the superlative excellence of that Gospel. It presents us with a more

[ocr errors]

exact representation of the private character of our Saviour, of his reasonings with the Jews, and his conversations with his disciples. The more closely it is studied, the more clearly will its merits appear, which are not yet by any means sufficiently Indeed, such, a priori, apprehended.

ought its character to be, from the particu lar attention shewn to our Historian by his Divine Master. A very pleasing confirmation of the truth of our religion! But the simplicity of the evangelical narratives will not be relished by the admirers of that contemptible scoffer Gibbon; whose history, I confidently affirm, no person of taste could scarcely endure to read, but for the facts, which are not accessible to all; whose antipathy to our religion, as that of most other cavillers, is the legiti mate offspring of ignorance, depravity and conceit: whose fabricated compilations are as nearly allied to the authenticity of history, as his artificial composition and turgid diction to the unaffected charms, the simple dignity, the native eloquence of Xenophon, of Cæsar and the Gospels. If Gibbon be a fine writer, those heroes of antiquity, his diametrical opposites in every character of composition, who have carried away every vote of every man of taste in every age, were the merest bunglers in their profession. Gibbon may write well, but then, most undoubtedly, Xenophon, Casar, and Luke, are contemptible historians."

Whether Mr. Wakefield undervalued the literary character of Mr. Gibbon's work, from a prejudice easily excited by a strong sense of its immoralities, and whether Mr. Porson, by his manner of exposing what he mildly termed a few faults, did not detract from his panegyric, on what he ranked among the ablest performances of its kind that has ever appeared; these are considerations which I submit to that numerous class of your readers, whose own studies and attaiuments have prepared them for such inquiries.

REGRESSUS.

[blocks in formation]

from him. I am one of those who "rather comply with the custom of Infant Baptism as an innocent custom, than submit to it as a Christian duty;" and the arguments adduced in Mr. Belsham's Plea, have not convinced me that I have been in an error on this subject: I agree with Mr. Belsham, "that the baptizing children of baptized persons at an adult age has nothing to say for itself, and that the controversy really lies between those who consider baptism as a Christian ordinance, and those who think that the command to baptize has a reference only to proselytes." Of this latter class I am one, and beg leave to lay before your readers a few remarks on Mr. Belsham's arguments in favour of the opposite supposition. I object to the kind of evidence which Mr. Belsham produces. I certainly think, that if it were an ordinance positively and absolutely enjoined by Christianity, we should have had some precept or some clear example of it in the New Testament. The practice of religious worship, if not positively enjoined there, is so in the Old Testament, and is sanctioned by the example of Jesus and the apostles. The substitution of the first day of the week in lieu of the Jewish Sabbath, cannot, I think, be shewn to be a positive command, but is, like the custom of Infant Baptism, an innocent and laudable custom, early introduced into the Christian church, probably in the apostolic age, and resting for its authority or its expediency on the declaration of Paul, "that ali days are in reality alike," and that, consequently, if a proper portion of time be set apart for religious service, it is of little consequence what day of the week be appropriated to that purpose. In Christian countries the first day is appropriated to public worship, that it may serve as a memorial of the great truths of our religion; and the change from the seventh to the first day, rests on the authority of expediency and of tradition, which is sufficient to shew that it is not forbidden, though it cannot be proved that it was ever commanded. If Mr. Belsham will be satisfied with a similar degree of authority being ascribed to Infant Baptism, I am ready to agree with him. I think the facts which he has proPaced sufficient to prove that it is an

innocent and laudable custom, expe. dient, as affording a good opportunity of impressing on the minds of the child's relations, the duties which they ought to fulfil towards it, and probably observed in the apostolic age, perhaps by the apostles themselves, and certainly without their making any opposition to it; but I do not think the evidence which he has brought forward, sufficient to establish it as a positive injunction of Christianity. The evidence of the authenticity of the books of the New Testament, appears to me to differ very materially from that respecting baptism, the testimony of the fathers to the first, being evidence to a fact, with respect to which it is morally impossible that they should have been mistaken, that with respect to the latter being evidence to a doctrine in which they very probably might be mistaken, and with respect to their reasonings, concerning which Mr. Belsham allows, that they were almost all mistaken. As to the assertion, page 10, "In fact, there is no book of that collection, which forms the New Testament, the evidence of which can be compared in clearness and decision, with that which establishes the apostolic origin of Infant Baptism;" if your readers will compare the evidence produced in the Plea, with the mass of evidence to the genuineness of the books of the New Testament, to be found in Lardner's Credibility, they will be able to judge, whether this be not, at least, a very hyperbolical and unguarded assertion. If, however, Mr. Belsham, on the authority of tradition and the fathers only, claims Infant Baptism as a Christian institution, as a positive rite of Christianity, as a Christian duty, that is, as a doctrine of the Christian religion, then I do not see upon what grounds he rejects the testimony of the fathers to original sin, &c.; or if he say, that these are not similar as being not practices but speculations only, why does he reject the testimony of the fathers to the propriety of mixing water with wine at the Lord's Supper, and of many other superstitious practices, connected both with that ordinance and with baptism, such as the priest's being required to kiss the infant, which are equally sanctioned by the early fathers? Plea, p. 32. With

respect to the mode of administering baptism being discretionary, and to the use of baptism I agree with Mr. Belsham, but I think his own reasoning, if correct, would establish, that baptism ought always to be administered either by immersion or affusion, and not by sprinkling; as he has brought forward no instance of its being administered by sprinkling in the early ages of the church. Considering it, however, as I do, as an innocent and laudable custom, I regard this as immaterial, and think, that if the uses of the ceremony be attained, it is perfectly indifferent how it is administered; but if I were to regard baptism as a positive institution, I should certainly be led by Mr. Belsham's reasoning, to consider dipping or affusion as the only proper modes of administration. I wish Mr. Belsham had favoured us with some proof of the correctness of his translation of the parenthesis, “si non tam necesse est," in the passage quoted from Tertullian, pages 15 and 16: I cannot perfectly satisfy myself with any translation of the passage. It is certainly a very obscure one, but the most correct translation seems to me to be, "For why is it necessary, if baptism be not so necessary to salvation, that the sponsors also should be brought into danger?" This seems to me to be more literal than Mr. Belsham's translation, and more agreeable to the argument of Tertullian, who is opposing Infant Baptism. Hoping that these few remarks may, in some degree, tend to the elucidation of this subject, and retaining the sincerest respect and veneration for Mr. Belsham's high character, great talents, learning and zeal in the cause of truth, 1 remain,

T. C. H.

On Congregational Unitarian Funds.
LETTER II.
[See pp. 670-674.]

SIR,
Dec. 3, 1817.
AVING thus stated the impor-

the members of a Christian society to employ even those exertions which are in their power to promote its more diffusive spread, I beg to submit to your readers a few thoughts on the means by which it is now in the power of those who are converted to a right

understanding of the revelation by Jesus Christ, to strengthen their brethren.

And first; Shew yourselves decidedly to be of a party. We have much to lament, that even in our own immediate neighbourhood, there is so great a number of intelligent and respectable men, who think, and are willing to avow that they think, completely with us, and yet never are seen in our ranks, nor make a public avowal of their belief. The practice of going to the national church, or the custom of going no where to worship at all, keeps, alas! from our worship many who would be an honour to our cause, and would increase their own respectability by an upright and honest obedience to the dictates of their minds. We trust that the business of the house of God is calculated to improve both the minds and the hearts of all men, let them be ever so much esteemed on account of the dignity of their rank, or the intelligence of their minds; and then will it improve most, when it is most free from error and deceit. And truly, one sure means to induce others to think well of our principles, and to adopt and profess them, is, to let the world see how highly we respect them ourselves, by giving them every external mark of our esteem. I repeat my first charge:Let the world see that you belong to a party, a party which you have selected in preference to all others, because you think it deserves your preference. And be never ashamed or afraid to give to him that asketh a reason of the faith that is in you. Never let your neighbours think that truth is an object of no consequence to you; for if they think so, they will entertain a most, contemptible opinion either of your intellectual powers, or of your heart. An upright heart and an enlightened mind cannot regard with other than the strongest convictions of importance, that system of truth which the Almighty revealed with signs and

sealed with his blood.

great prophet

I know there are many who may object to what is called a party spirit. But let me ask, what is a party without a spirit? It is a head without intelli. gence, it is a body without a soul, it is a world without life. Where is the

cause that ever was brought to bear, whether it be economical, or commercial, or political, or religious, which has not owed all its success to the spirit by which the party has been animated, and to the vigour with which they have pursued their plans? In carrying these into effect, it is impossible that you should not oppose measures which other classes and societies have adopted. Would you make your corn to thrive? You must root up and destroy the weeds. Would you have one society to increase? It must be to the loss, perhaps the ruin, of another. This is the necessary order of things; and you might as well at tempt to unnerve the Almighty's arm, as to effect your purpose otherwise than as he has ordained in the necessary order of things.

I will only add, that while a party spirit will give you a decided purpose and a disposition to promote the best interests of mankind, it need not put violence into your character, or tempt you to employ any other means than those which reason and humanity approve. There is a parable among the teachings of our Lord, in which we read, "Compel them to come in, that my house may be full"! And this may be our motto. But let the compulsion we employ be the compulsion of argument, the force of benevolence and love, the persuasive eloquence of a manly, virtuous and undaunted deportment; for be assured that this will avail much.

Secondly-Use your individual influence to draw those who, through ignorance or prejudice, entertain false notions respecting us, to read and to hear for themselves. This is a point which it is in the power of the people to do much more than their minister can do. There is a kind of jealousy of the attempts a minister may make to convert men to his opinions. They may be attributed to various motives, or there may be a reluctance to discuss with him the points on which they differ. But your neighbours are upon equal terms with yourselves, and are not perhaps unwilling to enter the lists with you; or they may be gratified, if it be only from a principle of curiosity, to accompany you to the place where you are accustomed to offer up your devotions. I need not state that these means have led many,

very many, to correct the opinions they once entertained of us. They have often changed them from opponents to fellow-labourers in the same cause: and they would infallibly have the same effect upon thousands more, if those who are embarked in our cause were prudently to recommend to their friends and neighbours, an attention to the points on which we are at issue.

But allow me to remark ;—there is no better argument you can employ to convince them of the importance you attach to the sentiments you profess, than the respect you pay them by a steady attendance upon religious worship yourselves. This is a seal you set upon your own declarations and professions, which all can see, and which they cannot fail to understand. If the public worship which you have chosen to support, is not of an importance to you great enough to deserve your regular presence, and your serious and steady attention, you cannot expect that those to whom you speak of it will think it of any value to them. Prove to them that you value it by a regular, and I will add an early, attendance upon its pleasures and its advantages, and then may they attach an importance to it also.

And Thirdly;-Support, although it be by help ever so small, the general exertions that are making to promote the general interests of Unitarianism. There are some public measures which have greatly tended to increase the spread of evangelical truth. These ought to be universally known, and more generally attended to.

One of them is the Society, which originated in the metropolis, and has extended its branches to all the divisions of the kingdom, for the distribution of books and pamphlets that teach correct and useful views of gospel truth. The benefit which has accrued from these societies is almost incalculable. Many hundred thousand tracts have, by means of them, been circulated throughout the kingdom, during the last twenty years, before which time, very few had been circulated, and the public at large were altogether in the dark as to Unitarian views of the gospel. We have a society of this kind, the

from

which works may be obtained which are admirably calculated to distribute amongst the members of society in

« AnteriorContinuar »