Page images
PDF
EPUB

QUERIES ON REPROVING THE SINS OF PROFESSING CHRISTIANS.

[merged small][ocr errors]

2. Should it appear to you that however loud and long may have been the profession of such a person, the habitual sin alluded to, gives evidence that the grace of God is not in the heart. Do you think it the duty of a christian, no way connected, to endeavour to arouse the conscience by a plain and direct testimony? or simply to withdraw from all intercourse beyond what courtesy to the connexions of the individual may require, committing the unhappy person to God in prayer ?

3. Should you on the contrary have scriptural grounds for thinking it possible that any portion of

spiritual life may exist in connexion with the awfully evil practice alluded to, and that Christian charity would lead us to look on the person, as an erring brother or sister? Will Christian prudence permit us to comply literally with the pre→ cepts contained in Lev. xix. 17, when the following consequences are likely to result?

The person may resist the conviction, may challenge proof of the existence of the sin as habitual. The very nature of the crime prevents its being discovered by one person to any extent, unless that one reside under the same roof. Should we then risk the public scandal which may be brought upon the church by the examining numerous persons? The danger of breaking up private friendships, by mentioning conversations ?The possibility of bringing great distress on the innocent connexions of the guilty person, &c.

Observe, it is not necessary to suppose the falsehoods malicious. Let them be rather thought of as produced by an endeavour to preserve a certain character in Society, and to bring about certain events by dint of management.

SOLEMN INQUIRIES.

L. M.

WHAT is the value of that grace that unites the sinner to the Saviour? What is the depth of that folly that prefers earth to heaven?

What is the glory of that land to which believers are travelling?

What is the worth of that faith that puts the sinner in possession of salvation ?

What proportion does time bear to an endless eternity ?

What is the value of the inheritance of the saints in light?

What is the amount of the debt which we owe to the Saviour?

What comparison between the afflictions of time and the joys of eternity?

[ocr errors]

What is guilt and danger of neglecting the great salvation?

What object so full of attraction as Christ crucified?

What is the hardness of that heart that can resist redeeming love?

What is the value of time? and what portions of it can we safely waste?

REVIEW OF BOOKS.

On the Incarnation of the Eternal will not have been exhibited in

Word. By the Rev. Marcus Dods. Belford. 8vo. Pp. xii. and 574. Seeleys. 1831.

"BEWARE," said the apostle," lest any man spoil you, through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ." The disregard of this counsel has in many ages produced immense evil in the church, and the same mystery of iniquity is still in active operation, beguiling the souls of the simple, reviving old and exploded errors and heresies, and, under the appearance of new and plausible discoveries, introducing most pernicious and fatal doctrines. In many cases, indeed, it may be said of modern heresiarchs, as of the Egyptians who withstood Moses, "They shall proceed no further, for their folly shall be manifest unto all men; yet still, during their short-lived empire, immense mischief is done; the minds of many are unsettled, and a spirit of scepticism and suspicion is introduced among others, by which they are fatally prejudiced against the truth.

Such, we have no doubt, has been the effect produced, in numerous instances, by the doctrines promulgated, and the proceedings recently sanctioned, at the Scotch Church, Regent Square. Evils, indeed, not unfrequently produce, to a certain extent, their own remedy, and some recent publications have gone very far to produce an impression that fraud as well as folly has been connected with the extraordinary scenes, which have, in numerous instances, pained and scandalized the true Christian, while they have provoked the scorn and ridicule of the ungodly and profane.

These painful scenes, however,

[blocks in formation]

vain, if they lead us back from the sentiments of man to the oracles of God. Our appeal must ever be to the law and to the testimony; if men speak not according to that word, there is no light in them :no theological attainments which are not founded on Holy Scripture, are of any real value; and the opinions of men, of the greatest of men, whether Fathers or Martyrs, or learned Professors, or popular Preachers, must be tried by the unerring standard of God's word, or they will, through the corruption of our own hearts, and the blindness of our understandings, lead ns away from the only path of safety and of happiness.

Far be it from us indeed to undervalue the labours of eminent Theologians and Divines, or to speak in that contemptuous way of Commentators which is sometimes indulged in by persons whose observations at the very moment show how little they are themselves acquainted with the authors they condemn. On the contrary the works of these pious and eminent men deserve our most attentive perusal, but we must follow them as they follow Christ, taking him for our Master and Lord, his word as our guide and standard, pouring out our souls daily in prayer for the teaching of the Holy Spirit, and being fully assured that every position which contradicts the declarations of the Book written by his Inspiration, must, however plausible in appearance, be really false and

erroneous.

Meanwhile the mistakes of some are, through the effectual operation of him who educeth good out of evil, often overruled for the benefit of his church and

people. The errors and heresies of the Judaizing teachers at Corinth and Galatia induced the

Apostle under the Holy Spirit's influence to record most instructive warnings, statements, and exhortations; the delusions and corruptions of popery called forth the works of Wickliff and Luther, and Latimer and Jewel; the errors of a later age produced the incomparable work of Hooker, and in almost every period some able and zealous advocate for the truth has appeared at the very moment when his labours and services were more especially needed.

We are not indeed prepared to maintain that Mr. Dods is to be enshrined in that bright constellation to which we have referred, but his work is able, seasonable, deserving every way of serious perusal, evincing very sound and clear judgment, and careful and extensive reading, and it is written in a most cheering and edifying strain of Christian charity. There is nothing personal, or irritating in the whole volume, and our author's forbearance in this respect is the more praiseworthy when contrasted with the lofty tone, the overbearing manner, and the assumption of superior literary and spiritual attainments, advanced continually by those whose sentiments he opposes.

The object of the work is to establish these two positions, First, That the Word was made flesh ;and Secondly, That he was NOT made SINFUL flesh. The first proposition is generally maintained among us ;-the latter has recently been most confidently denied, and our author has therefore done well in entering at large upon the subject; and in establishing with a profusion of argument, and a closeness of demonstration which some may think superfluous, the perfect and immaculate purity of the bumanity of the Son of God.

The volume consists of two parts, in the first the subject is introduced by some preliminary observations, and our author then proceeds to treat of Christ as our Prophet, Priest, and King-he next adds

General Remarks, Scripture testimonies, a dissertation on the phrase 'fallen nature,' which he maintains to be an inaccurate expressionand a sermon on Heb. iv. 15. by a friend. In the second part, he introduces the judgment of the primitive church concerning the human nature of our Lord under the heads of General View and Particular Testimonies.

It would very far exceed our limits were we to enter at any length into the able argument of Mr. Dods, and we are persuaded that with regard to the generality of our readers, it is wholly unnecessary. Those whose minds have been at all unsettled by the bold positions of some modern teachers will here find how nearly such dogmas coincide with the heresies of the Gnostics and the Nestorians; and our clerical readers who may wish to obtain in narrow compass a defence of the orthodox doctrine of the incarnation, will find their time well employed in the perusal of this work. There are however, some observations of general interest, which we shall now proceed to extract, and which may at the same time furnish fair specimens of our author's style and manner.

In the preliminary observations, some judicious remarks occur on the time of the Incarnation, and the eircumstances accompanying that event; which are summed up in the following passage.

Upon the whole, the verse in which the angel announces the incarnation, does so very clearly shew, that the flesh of Christ did differ from the flesh of other men, and shews also so distinctly in what that difference consists, namely, in that it was generated holy, as no other flesh ever was, and consequently neve needed, nor was ever susceptible of regeneration, that had I no other object in view than to prove this, I should not deem it necessary to write another line upon the subject. But a particular view of the work which Christ did in the flesh, besides affording abundant proofs that he was not fallen and sinful,

will also lead us to considerations which possess an interest and an usefulness altogether independent of this point, a point however, let it not be forgotten, than which not one of more vital importance is to be found within the whole range of Christian theology. I shall therefore proceed to take a view of the different offices which Christ executes as our Redeemer; and we shall then be able to determine whether these are offices which could be sustained by a fallen sinful man.'-Pp. 53, 54.

In treating of Christ as our prophet, he observes,

And if the life of Christ was in reality a living manifestation of all the perfections of God, and if we know God, because God has verily dwelt in the flesh amongst us, then it is obvious, not merely that the Son, who became our Prophet, to reveal unto us the Father, must of necessity become flesh, since in no other way that we know could he make that revelation; but it is not less obviously necessary, that the flesh which he took should be perfectly holy, else it is not conceivable how his life could afford us any exhibition of the holiness of God. He might have shewed to us the holiness of a man, such as Abraham or Moses, carried to a higher degree of perfection, even to the extent of avoiding all actual transgression of the law of God. But if his flesh was really sinful, if it ever felt the slightest propensity or inclination to sin,-an inclination which required to be repressed, in order to prevent it from proceeding to actual guilt, then this propensity was itself criminal,-it was just that carnal concupiscence, that lusting of the flesh against the spirit, which we derive from the fail, and which effectually disqualified him in whom it dwelt, from giving any practical revelation of the divine holiness in his life. He was exactly in the situation of other fallen men; he might be a very bright monument of divine grace; but the revealer of God, -the author of the grace of illumination, he could no more be, than any other fallen and regenerated man. that grace he might have received a richer abundance than any other fallen man ever received; but he stood in exactly the same predicament as they did, and therefore, though perhaps we cannot reasonably hope to receive quite as large a measure of that wisdom which maketh wise unto salvation, from Abraham "the friend of God," or from

Of

a

Aaron, the "Saint of the Lord," or from Paul "the apostle of the Gentiles," as from him in whom the work of regeneration had a more perfect operation than it had in them; yet assuredly the same principle that authorizes us to expect that grace from one fallen and regenerated man, authorizes us to expect the same grace, though perhaps in a somewhat inferior degree, from any other fallen and regenerated man. All this is not the only point on which the doctrine of the Lord's fallen humanity, gives the most direct and decisive sanction to the worship of the Saints: the sanction becomes still stronger and more decisive, when we reflect, that though we may probably expect a more abundant measure of wisdom from Christ, than from any other fallen and regenerated man, yet we may unquestionably expect the highest measure of that wisdom, when we seek it both from him, and also from all other fallen and regenerated men. In him indeed, that concupiscence of the flesh, which characterizes fallen man, might be kept as “ spring shut up, and a fountain sealed," from which no emanation of actual guilt was ever permitted to proceed. The motions of sin in the flesh might in him be so powerfully and successfully repressed, that it might be truly said of him in whom these motions wrought, that he did no sin;" but with what truth it could be said of him, whose whole life was an unceasing, however successful struggle against the will of the flesh, compelling "the flesh against its will," into however perfect a harmony with the will of God, that he "knew no sin," is to me altogether incomprehensible. If the concupiscence of the flesh existed in him at all, however successfully subdued, it existed as the germ of all actual transgression,-as containing in it the elements of all human guilt,as the object of just wrath, and deserved punishment, as that which can be rendered fit for communion with God, only through that shedding of blood, without which there can be no remission, and consequently totally depriving him in whom it existed, of all claim to the title. and of all power to accomplish the purposes, of a " Lamb without blemish, and without spot.”—Pp. 61—64.

After dwelling on the malignity of sin, Mr. D, thus proceeds,

"And when this demonstration of the malignity of sin has been for ages exhibited to the examination of men and

of angels, when we have seen one sin spreading its contamination over a whole world, and over all generations of men, and shewing its poison in the production of a guilt and a misery that baffle all calculation and all conception, is this demonstration, overwhelming though it be, the most painful, and the most awful exhibition, of the "exceeding sinfulness of sin," which God hath given to angels and to men? No. Notwithstanding this demonstration, the evil of sin, inconceivable as it is shewn to be, might yet have a limit, and its misery might have an end. Therefore a demonstration more striking still, and one which may prove that the evil of sin is truly and properly infinite, was wanted; lest men, ever apt to undervalue that evil, should come to think that the sufferings of life, and the pangs of death, form a sufficient expiation for it. The only begotten Son of God is sent forth, to teach us this, among other things, that the holiness of God is something far beyond all conception, that his aversion to sin is wholly unalterable,-and that, in short, there is a hatefulness in sin, which we can no more comprehend, than we can comprehend the perfections of God. We have seen the effects of one sin, and these are disastrous beyond all calculation. But the death of our Divine Prophet affords a demonstration even beyond this, else it would not have been given. When angels saw him, whom they were accustomed to worship, go forth into the world "in the likeness of sinful flesh," when they saw him take upon himself the penalty due to the sins of a lost world,-when they saw him undertake to pay a debt of such incalculable magnitude, they would be ready to say, 'Surely it is sufficient that he has had goodness enough to undertake for these fallen creatures! The debt will not be in reality exacted; the penalty will not be unsparingly inflicted. The sins which could not be forgiven to the creature, will be freely forgiven to the only begotten and wellbeloved Son, when he has taken them upon himself. A little may be exacted, in order to prove the reality of his suretyship; a little may be inflicted, in order to prove the reality of his substitution; but surely the whole will never be either required or inflicted. The trangressions of the law, which could not be forgiven to the actually guilty creature, may well be forgiven, when they become, by imputation, the transgressions of him who is above the

law. He will spare the Son.' But no, not one pang due to the guilt was withheld, not one drop of gall which guilt had mingled in our cup, was abstracted from his. "The Lord hath laid on him the iniquities of us all ;" and he is able to forgive every sin, because there is no sin, the bitterness resulting from which he did not feel to the full. And this is what constitutes his death so awful, and solemn, and impressive a demonstration, beyond all other demonstrations, of the infinite and inconceivable holiness of God, and of the unspeakable hatefulness of sin, that though he who took our iniquities upon himself was the wellbeloved Son, yet not one pang due to guilt was spared him.

[ocr errors]

But what becomes of this demonstration, if Christ was fallen and sinful? His death was then no greater a demonstration of the evil of sin, than our own. He took our sins upon him, and in consequence of the imputation of them, even though he was the well-beloved Son, he was not forgiven, but died for them. But if this assumption of our sins was not the sole ground of his death, if he was bound to die on some other ground besides the imputation of our sins, then the doctrine of imputation itself begins to be doubtful; for we have it only declared in words, but not exhibited in clear and unequivocal action and moreover it is in vain to look to the cross of Christ for the most decisive proof that was ever given, of the infinite holiness of God, and hatefulness of sin; for he was only in the situation of an infant, which is fallen and sinful, but guiltless of actual transgression. From the death of such an infant, we learn quite as much of the holiness of God, and the evil of sin, as we learn from the cross of Christ, if he was fallen and sinful. Under the sanction of such a principle, it certainly cannot be matter of surprize, if the necessity of an atonement should be denied, and sin should be considered as something sufficiently slight, to be abundantly expiated by our own sufferings and death. But if we reject the tenet that Christ was fallen and sinful, and died because he was so, then does his cross afford such a fearful proof of the evil of sin, as the universe never saw before, nor can ever see again. And that proof of the sinfulness of sin, involves in it, also, a new and most impressive illustration, of the goodness and grace of God, proving it to be truly infinite. For if such be the hatefulness

« PreviousContinue »