« PreviousContinue »
guished from the discoveries of the Bible, which point out the high aim of true life. This is the more charitable construction to put upon the reasonings under present consideration, and to which we shall give special prominence in further dealing with the question, although the two forms in which dogma and doctrine are set forth in the writings specified, are scarcely separable. One thing is obvious, that the scope of such sentiments is to exalt the Christian life at the expense of Christian doctrine, and that by making a complete and lasting severance of the one from the other. Such a divorce, however, is nowhere to be found save in the imagination of these so-called men of progress, and as we shall now proceed to show, is opposed to the dictates of sound reason, and of divine revelation, and utterly subversive of man's highest interests.
First, It is inconsistent with the dictates of sound reason, and the ordinary practice of men in all other departments. Christian doctrine separated from, and in no way necessarily associated with, Christian living! Such a sentiment carries with it its own refutation, and were the principle which it involves even mooted in domain than that of theology it would be put down as the result of mental aberration. Could any other idea be formed of the man who would labour assiduously to prove that light and heat are distinct from, and independent of, the sun from which they emanate-or that water has no necessary connection with the fountain from which it flows—the fruit with the root from which it springs—the working of machinery with the laws of mechanism—a building with the foundation on which it rests ? Equally consistent with reason and common sense would that man be who might say, Let us only have lighıt and heat, and their source and theory need not concern us--Give us only water to drink, and for cleansing purposes, and we need not trouble ourselves about the spring down in the earth out of sight-If we only get the ripe and delicious fruit, the root embedded in the soil is of no consequence to us—Let us only have the useful
roducts of machinery, or of trade, and the laws of mechanism or of commerce may be discarded; with the man who expects to reap the fruits of the Christian life, apart from the root of Christian doctrine. For just as in the one case, we could not possibly enjoy the blessings of light and heat, were the sun blotted out of the firmament, feast upon the ripe fruit, or be regaled with the fragrance, and under the cooling shade which the orchard supplies, were the trunk or the stem severed from the root; so in the other, equally impossible would it be, to engage in the duties, or realize the privileges and enjoyments of a religious life, without the belief in Christian doctrine. The two are as inseparable as are cause and effect. If sound doctrine be understood and sincerely believed, the outward life will be in exact accordance with it. The latter is the progressive counterpart of the former. For example, no one could seriously believe that his house was on fire, and yet remain motionless and indifferent as if all were right. The belief of this would irresistibly impel him to vigorous action, with the view of extinguishing the flames, and saving life and property. Is the intelligence conveyed that some dreadful explosion has occurred in the bowels of the earth, by which the lives of hundreds of our fellow-men are jeoparded? Does not the very knowledge of this incite to active effort; to rescue the living, or to recover the bodies of the dead? Besides, the very belief that is thereby engendered, that such a calamity may again occur, leads to the devising and adoption of precautionary measures to prevent it.
man seriously believe that a suitable remedy has been discovered for some hitherto supposed incurable malady, under which he may have been suffering, without at once acting in accordance with his belief in the way of resorting without delay to its adoption ? The prescriptions formerly used are discarded, and the new one resorted to. In like manner, if any one sincerely believes in the doctrine of man's ruin by the Fall, is deeply sensible of its consequences, and in the doctrine of redemption through the atonement of Christ, he cannot but be filled with anxiety and alarm, and so be stirred up to the diligent and prayerful use of the means which God hath appointed, that he may escape the one and enjoy the blessings of the other. May we not then well ask, what truth can be more evident, reasoning from no higher ground than common sense, than the impossibility of separating belief in religious doctrine from the actions of a religious life? “Whatever man may do besides," says the eloquent Vinet," and whatever he may pretend, he cannot so act, but that his life shall demonstrate his knowledge, or his ignorance of eternal things. Visibly or invisibly, either in a positive or negative manner, all conduct has reference to it. Of necessity, he has some principles. His character will be influenced by his belief or disbelief in the existence of God, and his ideas of the divine nature. The creed will determine the man. Every one will readily acknowledge that the most serious consequences are involved in the different solutions of these great leading questions; that every thing without exception depends on this one point; that the whole being is modified and determined by it; and that in a general, but profound sense, to know what we believe, is to know what we are.” (Essay on Personal Religious Conviction. By Prof. A. Vinet, p. 67).
But we have further to note here, that such a sentiment is inconsistent with, and opposed to, the ordinary practice of men, in all other
departments of life. We have no respect for the man who is nothing more than a theoriser, and the self-important, obstinate empiricist is not more entitled to esteem. What are all the well-ascertained facts of science, or the deductions naturally and incontrovertibly drawn from them, but doctrines to be firmly believed until at least they are disproved? And what are the useful arts in all their departments, but the practical application of these principles or doctrines ? There is no divorce of belief in doctrine, from practical action in any of the other walks of life, professional or commercial. We find no trace of it in the legal profession. Before a man is allowed to practise as a solicitor, or as an advocate, he must undergo a regular course of training in the different departments of law, and his knowledge of the general principles and the application of these to particular cases is thoroughly tested. The advocate entrusted with the defence of another, does not proceed in a haphazard way, or depend upon the inspiration of the moment, or upon the favourite opinions of the multitude. No, he acquaints himself with the clearly defined, and universally recognised principles of law bearing upon the case, and then by the correct application of these to the different facts elicited in the course of investigation, he endeavours to establish the position of his client. Without a definite and acknowledged standard he could not, and he would regard it presumptuous even to attempt to proceed one step. Further, we find no trace of it in the medical profession. Here likewise a systematic course of training in the principles and practice of surgery and medicine is indispensable to being allowed to practise as a surgeon or physician. And the whole practice is conducted in accordance with the principles of the school of medicine in which the practitioner has been trained. Nay more, a medical adviser is chosen in many instances according to the school with which he identifies himself, it may be Allopathy or Homeopathy. Were a man attempting to palm himself off as a physician without having passed through the regular curriculum, or without having been certified as versed in the principles and practice of medicine, he would be despised. Hence quackery in all its forms is looked upon with contempt, both by the profession and by society. In like manner, in all the departments of mercantile life, in banking, in agriculture, in navigation, system or doctrine, and practice invariably go together, for the very obvious reason, that in no case in ordinary life can they be separated. In the name of common sense then we ask, why is the attempt so generally made to sever them in the highest form of life, in the most dignified of all employments, the service of God? Is it because they are separated in fact, or even separable ? Nay, and we make bold to add, without fear of laying
ourselves open to the charge of being uncharitable, that it is the wish more than the sincere conviction of those who give expression to such a sentiment. The conclusion is inevitable, that just as knowledge of, and belief in, certain theories in law, or medicine, or mercantile life, is followed up by a corresponding practice, so a real heart acquaintance with, and belief in, the great leading doctrines of revelation, such as, the being and attributes of God, the Trinity, the Fatherhood, the Eternal Sonship of Christ, the Personality and Work of the Holy Spirit, the Atonement, &c., cannot but exercise an influence upon the outward life corresponding with their heavenly and divine nature.
Secondly,- It is opposed to the whole teaching of Scripture. This might almost be inferred from the foregoing, inasmuch as whatever is manifestly opposed to the dictates of sound reason, and to the universally recognised principles by which the concerns of ordinary life are regulated, is not likely to be supported by revelation. But we are not left to mere inference on the subject. Throughout the whole Book of God the sentiments under review meet with explicit and emphatic condemnation. Here, faith and life, doctrine and duty, are indissolubly joined together. Nowhere throughout the whole compass of revelation do we find even a shadow of countenance given to the idea, that man may live independent of law, and yet be right—that reason and conscience are safe guides that any action is right, if it be but done conscientiously. In opposition to all this, with an emphasis that cannot be resisted, God's Word declares, “The carnal mind is enmity against God, is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.' And Jesus says, “ Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free;" clearly implying that a knowledge of revealed truth lies at the foundation of all true freedom. And that this union of a heart knowledge of the truth and a religious life, harmonises with the general terms of Scripture teaching that the one is necessary to the other, that the life is attained only in so far as the doctrine is embraced, will appear evident from the following Scripture illustrations. As early as God's transaction with our first parents in Eden we find the two associated. God laid down in definite, systematic form, what was required of them in order to the continued life and happiness of them and their posterity. Like our modern progressionists, however, they were not to be fettered by any such restricted line of duty. Setting aside doctrine, they did what was right in their own eyes, and we know the terrible consequence of this first case of severance of life from law. They acted upon the advice of Satan, and he is the prime mover in all similar conduct still. Coming farther down in the early history of the world, we find that Moses, the typical
mediator between God and Israel, and Israel themselves, had no idea of a holy life apart from a divinely prescribed course of action. Thus in Exodus xxiv. 3, it is said, “And Moses came and told the people all the words of the Lord, and all the judgment: and all the people answered with one voice, and said, all the words which the Lord hath said will we do.” The liberal men of our day would have answered Moses differently.
In accordance with their avowed views, they would have said, “We are not to be bound by this prescribed line of conduct, or fettered by such restrictions." “We may maintain a religious walk independent of such forms." This may be Broad-Churchism, but it is not true Churchism, if we believe the Church to be built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief corner stone. Moses again said, in addressing Israel: “These words which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart: And thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up' (Deut. vi. 6, 7). In confirmation of the same truth, the following admonition was addressed to Moses in view of his making the tabernacle, “See that thou make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the mount." He was not allowed to depart even a hairbreadth from the prescribed form. What bigotry! our modern men of progress no doubt would have exclaimed. Some latitude might have been allowed to encourage the exercise of man's inventive faculties. What about the prescribed pattern if the erection of the tabernacle be accomplished? Moses, however, had no other course left, if he would enjoy the continued favour of God, than do exactly as he was instructed, or in modern phraseology, act the bigot. His successor Joshua pursued a similar policy. David speaks of the blessedness of the man who walks in the law of the Lord, and that keeps His testimonies. Again, he says—I have chosen the way of truth, thy judgments have I laid before me (Ps. cxix. 30). God's truth, God's judgments he laid down as the basis of his outward conduct. He felt he was only right in heart and life, in so far as he conformed to these, and wrong in so far as he deviated from them. Similar is the testimony and practice of all Old Testament saints. Turning to the New Testament we find testimony and experience no less explicit in confirmation of the truth we have been endeavouring to establish. The exponents of the false views under consideration, and all their followers, are completely discarded by Christ and His apostles. What could be more decided in condemnation of their sentiments, than the following language of the Divine Redeemer, “ If a man love me, he