Larger Catechism it is said, "Christ hath appointed the ministers of his word, in the administration of this sacrament of the Lords Supper, to set apart the bread and wine from common use, by the word of institution, thanksgiving, and prayer." * It may be asked, whether it be proper to use the term consecration in regard to the sacraments, and to speak of consecrating the elements, instead of blessing them? I believe this language was once quite current and unchallenged; and it is still usual to call the prayer before the administration of the Lord's Supper" the consecration prayer." A prejudice, however, now exists against this part of the service, or rather against the use of this term. This arises, probably, from the practice that prevails in some churches of consecrating other objects without authority or wisdom; and the superstitious veneration with which the mere elements are viewed in the Church of Rome. But how vastly different is that which is called the consecration of the elements in Protestant churches from the consecration practised in the Church of Rome. Protestants declare the elements are consecrated by the words of institution, thanksgiving, and prayer; the Church of Rome professes to consecrate them by the priest pronouncing the words, "Hoc est corpus meum," this is my body. The Church of Rome alleges that by consecration the bread is changed into the real body and blood of Jesus Christ. Protestants declare that the consecration produces no real change upon the elements, but only a relative change, constituting them sacramental signs of the body and blood of Christ. To consecrate just means to set apart to a sacred use; and consequently consecration is a convenient term to express, in an abbreviated form, the setting apart of the elements from a common to a holy use. Thus understood, the term is perfectly harmless; but I would not contend for retaining a word which may suggest to some minds improper ideas, and which has certainly been grossly abused in some churches. By the consecration of the elements, all enlightened Protestants understand nothing more than the blessing of the elements, and by the blessing of the elements nothing more than the setting apart of the bread and wine to a sacred and sacramental use, so that they are no more common and vulgar elements, but the sacred symbols or sacraments of Christ's body and blood. THE EVANESCENT NATURE OF ALL ON EARTH, Fallen as the world is, it presents many scenes that are "fair and lovely, and of good report." The labours in which mankind are engaged under the arrangements of an all-wise Providence, are carrying forward the world, and the Church, and the human race, and the created universe, towards the consummation of the Divine counsels. But viewed strictly in themselves, viewed solely in relation to this world, all that we see and hear around us, all this incessant whirl, this perpetual motion, by which mortals are agitated; all for which they think deep thoughts, and are filled with consuming anxiety; all for which art, science, genius, labour, industry, avarice, keep mankind in a stir, is temporary and evanishing. From it every individual must in time be taken away, and he shall carry along with him nothing of all his outward labours and possessions. Thus generation will arise after generation, and man after man will struggle up this great sandhill, some at one height and some at another, but all of them to *Larger Catechism, Ans. to Quest. 169. be buried at length in its bosom. Of all the labours of mankind on earth during the most extended series of generations, nothing will remain at last, but those which had respect to God, which had regard to the soul, which looked forward to eternity. We say which look forward to eternity; for the brevity of man's existence, and the perishing nature of all earthly labours and enjoyments, when taken in connection with the wisdom and goodness of God, constitute a proof that man was not made for this world alone, but that the present state is merely preparatory to another, even to an immortal scene of existence. In a world tenanted by a dying population, whose past history is written on tombstones, whose present generations are melting away, where irresistible and unsparing death is incessantly at work, in such a world it is of great importance both to the comfort and the elevation of the soul, to have deep, broad, practical, and moral convictions, of the immortal destiny that awaits mankind. Of this truth there are many proofs drawn from the present state of the world, but none of these is more calculated to strike its roots deep into the higher departments of the nature, in pious and contemplative minds, than the inference deduced from the empty, vanishing, perishing nature of all that is on earth. Suppose that there is no hereafter; suppose that the grave entombs both soul and body, then what is our world but a nursery for the grave? What is our race but an infinite procession of mournful shadows flitting onwards from non-existence to the tomb, and, in their phantom-march, performing a series of visionary evolutions, in no respect of more importance, if of so much, to any ultimate result, than the diversified motions of vapour in the firmament? If there is no hereafter, then we must believe that God formed man, and bestowed on him these wonderful capacities, and placed him in this beautiful world, for no other purposes than to eat and drink, to grow and decay, to think, and labour, and die, and be no more. If man is immortal, then we can in some degree understand the decay of every thing besides upon the earth— we can in some degree comprehend in that case the death of the inferior animals—at least, it affords us some relief to regard these as the organised retinue, the animated but mortal attendants and servants of an immortal Lord. But if the lord of the lower world is as mortal as his vassals, if the sons of men die as the beast dieth, then we may exclaim like the psalmist, "Surely thou hast made all men in vain." If man be not immortal, then God made these bodies of ours which are so "fearfully and wonderfully wrought "-he made the soul and endowed it with such exalted capacities, and placed it in a world so great, so fair, so abundantly replenished with the monuments of divine power, and wisdom, and goodness he made all this for no worthy end-for what end is gained by our life if we die and be no more for ever? What better is each of us than one of an eternal succession of foam-bells, that rise and sparkle on the flowing waters, and then melt and vanish away into nothingness. If a man were to build a princely palace, and furnish it in the most exquisite and expensive style, for the habitation of one of those insects whose existence is bounded by a summer's day, and of which whole flocks pasture amid the hills and valleys of the smallest leaf, and whole armies of which encamp beneath the down of the tiniest flower, what would be said of his sanity? Would he not be every where regarded as acting an irrational part? And yet to frame a palace surpassing in magnificence all that ever was erected on the surface of our planet, for the momentary dwelling-place of the paltriest insect that ever nestled amid verdure, or fluttered 2 B 2 in the sun, would be wise and rational, compared with the fabrication of such a world as this, for the residence of man, if he be not immortal. But God does nothing in vain. Wherever we turn our eyes to contemplate his works, whether we look up into the heavens, or abroad upon the earth and the sea, whether we consider objects near or remote, great or small, animate or inanimate, we every where discern the prints of the divine hand, the footsteps of divine wisdom. Wherever we look we discern an infinite economy, a divine frugality in the use of means; we see God accomplishing the greatest ends by the most insignificant means, manifold ends, at once, by the same means. And seeing the whole of creation proclaims to us that God does nothing in vain, we may conclude that ends worthy of himself, ends sufficient to repay all the care manifested in the universal scenes about us and above us; ends which will justify all the wisdom, and the power, and the patience, and the prospective benevolence that presided over the formation of our planet. Even though the visions of geology should prove to be true, and the divine providence should have been exercised during millions of ages in preparing this world for man, even this was worthily expended if the earth be a nursery for immortals with whom the regions of glory are to be peopled. But, on the other hand, ends worthy of the divine wisdom are not answered by all that men do in this world, and therefore there must be another stage of existence. Here man is only in the bud of his being, in the twilight of his day, and there must be a future world, where the flower shall be unfolded, and the everlasting light of an endless day arise upon him. Let us seek to realise eternity and our own immortality; let us get this truth wrought into the texture of our souls; let it imbue all our thoughts, and feelings, and plans, and labours. How unworthy are the like of us to enter heaven. Shall enemies, rebels, traitors, be taken up to dwell in the king's palace? Shall the lowly children of the earth, the frail offspring of mortality, the seed of evil doers, be admitted to the fellowship of the pure, serene, and lofty spirits who surround the throne of God? Yes, they all may. The design of the gospel is to unfold the glorious purpose for effecting this through the substitution of the Lord Jesus Christ. "It is life eternal to know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent." The uncertainty of time, and the inconceivable greatness of the interests at stake, should stir up every nerve without delay "to flee from the wrath to come and lay hold on eternal life." REVIEWS. FREE CHURCH WRITERS ON THE ATONEMENT CONTROVERSY. The Inability of Man, both Natural and Moral. By the Rev. JAMES GIBSON. The Old Orthodox Faith superior to Modern Opinions; or, Truth and Error surveyed in the Light of History and Fact, a Short Treatise for the Times. By the Rev. JOHN G. LORIMER, author of the Protestant Church of France, Manual of Presbytery, &c. The subjects in discussion between the Old Orthodox Faith and the New Theology, are, in our estimation, not only the great questions of the day, but the great questions of all time. They refer to a class of problems of a permanent nature, of the highest order of all that pertain to the government of God and the destiny of man, which take their rise in that elevated, but hitherto imperfectly explored and myste rious region, where the agency of the creature comes into contact with that of the Creator. For this very reason, some may deem these questions to be matters of no importance-questions which in no degree affect practice, however they may be settled. But such a conclusion would be more specious than solid. The more nearly we approach the first principles of any science, accuracy is of the more importance, and error is the more extensively dangerous, inasmuch as it must leaven the whole system of opinions that flow from these principles; just as when the spring is corrupted, it will diffuse impurity throughout all its streams, even to the remotest distance. Nor let it be thought that the right settlement of these questions has no effect upon practice. It might have been supposed that the study of the heavens could never possibly have the least effect in regulating the course of man upon the earth; and yet it was by observing celestial phenomena, by watching and determining the motions of bodies, situated at an inconceivable distance from us, in the unfathomable depths of space, that geography and navigation, and dialling and chronology were brought to perfection, and thus wisdom came down from heaven to earth, and the solution of problems connected with the stars taught men to move over the whole extent of the earth, and over the trackless ocean, and even to move underneath the earth, with all but infallible accuracy. And wherefore should it be thought that the first principles, and the higher problems of theology, are of no importance? Must not the views which we form of God in those lofty regions affect all our opinions and feelings respecting Him throughout the whole descending region of sentiment and feeling? The human mind in all ages, and under all forms of religion, has been directed to these sublime questions in one form or another, and the most varied opinions have been held respecting them. These opinions appear to differ from one another chiefly in respect to the question how much belongs to God, and how much belongs to man? The various solutions given to this question seem to us to have arisen almost entirely from the difference in the starting point. It appears from observation, and from history, that either by natural constitution, or as the result of education, there are two distinct classes of mind, with twofold tendencies in regard to the first principles of thought and reasoning. The tendency of the one class is to begin with God as the first truth, and to view all things in their relation to God, and dependence upon Him. The tendency of the other class is to begin with man, and to view all things in their bearing on his free will and moral dignity. The opinions of the one class resemble the Ptolemaic system of the world, which began with the earth, and made it the centre of the universe around which the sun and all the planetary stars revolved as tributaries. The opinions of the other class resemble the Copernican system of the world, which places the sun in the centre, and converts the earth into a planetary globe, which performs its tributary movements, around a world of superior grandeur. There seems to be a natural or acquired habit in one class of minds to begin with God, and to make careful provision for the preservation of his divine and glorious prerogatives— to make God the centre around which the created universe performs its harmonious yet dependent movements, while it appears to be the natural or acquired habit of another class to begin with man, to make freedom of will and liberty of conscience the centre around which all things else revolve as satellites, so that even the claims of God must be abated and adjusted until they harmonise with the dignity of man. The existence of these diverse habits is abundantly seen in history, and has been strikingly displayed in recent controversies. Those who, in the voluntary controversy, maintained the headship of Christ over the nations, in the nonintrusion controversy were found maintaining the headship of Christ over the Church, and in the controversies that have arisen respecting the atonement and the work of the spirit have been found maintaining the sovereignty of God and the moral and spiritual dependence of man; while those who, in the voluntary controversy, made liberty of conscience the central principle in their system, have generally been found more or less to depress the doctrine of divine sovereignty, and to pay a sensitive and morbid homage to the free-will of man, even where it was not made the centre of the moral universe: to this latter statement there is one remarkable exception, though it would be curious to know whether his voluntaryism remains unaffected by his advocacy of Calvinism. Each of these systems of arrangement may be carried to a dangerous extreme; but that we ought to begin with God, and in all things first to consult for his rights and claims, is evident from many considerations. It is evident, in the first place, from the fact that God was before all, and that all things proceeded from him. It is evident, in the second place, from the fact that God is above all, and that all things, whether temporal or spiritual, are subject to him, during every moment of their existence. It is evident, in the third place, from the fact, that the rights and the liberties of man have their origin in the claims and prerogatives of God. They begin, therefore, at the wrong end, who make the powers and prerogatives of man the first article in their creed, or the chief object of their solicitude: they convert the pinnacle into the foundation-they make the earth the centre of the universe-they make God the satellite of man. The fundamental error of the new theology consists in magnifying the claims and rights of man till they approximate to those of God, and in abating the sovereign claims of God, until his will and man's will are brought to an equality, and in some instances till the former is made to do real homage to the latter. It is deeply to be regretted that subjects of such importance as the atonement, the special operations of the Holy Spirit, and the related doctrines, should have been made the subject of dissension, and of flippant, noisy, and unseemly debate among those who had given in their adherence to an evangelical creed. The errors regarding these subjects now in general circulation are dangerous. From the vital nature of the doctrines assailed they may be compared to diseases in the heart, which are to be dreaded even in their mildest form. And if these errors are to be dreaded because of the importance of the doctrines to which they are opposed, they are not less to be guarded against because of the stealthy and deceitful manner in which they are usually propagated. We are not among those who think that ministers ought to be silent in regard to these errors about gospel truth. They are the soldiers of the gospel, and they have good authority for opposing all error and maintaining all truth. Are not all Christians commanded to "contend earnestly for the faith once delivered to the saints?" Are not the Epistles to the Galatians and the Romans laboured arguments in defence of the Gospel, mingled with just and severe rebukes to those by whom it had been corrupted? When staggering doctrines begin to be disseminated, the members of the Church, surely, have a right to expect that those who are over them in the Lord will give timeous warning and seasonable instruction. It is the duty of every gospel minister, in his place and station, accord |
