Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

4

THE

CRITICAL REVIEW.

For the Month of August, 1777.

A full Answer to a late View of the Internal Evidence of the Chriftian Religion. In a Dialogue between a rational Chriftian and his Friend. By the Editor of Ben Mordecai's Letters to Elisha Levi. 8vo. 25. 6d. Wilkie.

Uicquid recipitur, recipitur ad modum recipientis,'

Qthings are received according to the capacity of the

receiver, is an old maxim in logic, frequently exemplified. Thus, Christianity has been formed and modelled, according to the knowledge, the fentiments, "the views, the caprices of its profeffors. The papift has made it a fyftem of fpiritual ufurpation, cruelty, and fuperftition; the Calvinift has converted it into a system of absurdity, confifting of human creatures without liberty, do&rines without fenfe, faith without reafon, and a God without mercy.

Some have afferted, that the doctrines and precepts of re-* vealed religion are contrary to nature, fenfe, and reafon; and that this very circumstance is a mark of their divinity. Others have maintained fuch opinions, as are really contrary to reason, and all our natural notions of the divine attributes. For example that all men are in a state of perdition for an offence, which was committed by their firft parents, before they themfelves exifted; that the Father of the Univerfe has laid the greater part of the human race under the fentence of reprobation, before their birth, and determined to glorify his fovereignty and juftice in their damnation; that men have no ufe of their natural faculties, no liberty of will, no freedom of choice, in matters of morality and religion; and that the Deity, in order to fatisfy his juftice, and fave the ele&, has VOL. LXIV. Augufi, 1777.

G

[ocr errors]

punished an innocent perfon, inftead of the guilty. Others have fuppofed, that reason is no judge in thefe points, that if we would be good Chriftians, we must give up our understanding, and believe whatever paffes under the name of orthodoxy, with implicit faith. Others tell us, that a revelation, which comes from God, must be full of myfteries; that there is not a fufficient number of impoffibilities in religion for the exercise of an active faith *; and that a doctrine is credible because it is foolish; and certain, because it is impoffible. The words of Tertullian upon this topic are curious and emphatical Crucifixus eft Dei filius; non pudet, quia pudendum eft: et mortuus eft Dei filius; prorfus credibile eft, quia ineptum eft; & fepultus refurrexit; certum eft, quia impoffibile eft.' De Carne Chrifti. § 5.

It is of the highest importance, that the defenders of Chrif tianity fhould form right notions of its nature and fpirit, its doctrines and precepts; that they fhould not contend for notions, which are not revealed in fcripture; that they should not infift upon points, which are repugnant to reafon and common fenfe. If once they fly for fhelter to mystery and im plicit faith, they betray the caufe they pretend to fupport, and make that religion contemptible, which they would perfuade us is divine.

The author of this Anfwer to Mr. Jenyns has defended Christianity upon the most rational and manly principles. He gives the Deift no advantage by any weak or injudicious conceffions, but very properly intifts, that the New Teftamentcontains no contradictory tenets, no incredible relations, no articles of faith, which it is impoflible for a man of fenfe to conceive and admit; in fhort, that it contains nothing, but what is perfectly agreeable to reason, to the nature of man, and the attributes of an all-perfe&t Being.

He has thrown his treatife into the form of a dialogue between a rational Chriftian and his Friend; in which the latter exhibits a view of Chriftianity, and its internal evidence, in the words of Mr. Jenyns, and the former points out his fallacies, inconfiftencies, and misrepresentations. By this admirable expedient he has preferved a clear and precife diftinction between his own fentiments, and the notions, which he endeavours to explode.

In the beginning of this conference it is obferved, that the principles of Mr. Jenyns's View are dangerous; that, according to his reprefentation, Christianity is a heap of inconliftencies, without any fupport either from reafon, or divine at

Browne's Rel. Med. § 9.

teftation;

teftation; that the miracles and prophecies, though they are the evidences, upon which God and Chrift founded the proof of a divine revelation, are rendered wholly ufelefs; that the ufe of reafon is rejected; that the objections to Christianity are answered in an unfatisfactory manner; and that the whole edifice of revealed religion, as diftinct from the religion of na ture, is left without any kind of fupport.

After fome preliminary observations, calculated to fhew, that internal evidence only proves, that a revelation may be true, not that it is fo; that the abfolute certainty of it depends on the positive atteftation of God himself by miracles and prophecy, the author proceeds to confider Mr. Jenyns's propofitions.

The Friend, who perfonates Mr. Jenyns, afferts, that from the New Teftament may be extracted a system of religion entirely new, as to its object and doctrines. Its object, he fays, is to prepare men for the kingdom of heaven. His opponent replies, that the object of the heathens was the fame; for which he appeals to the authority of Socrates and Cicero *. But, fays the other, the notions of the philofophers con cerning a future ftate were mixed with doubt, The Rational Chriftian answers: Ours must be fo, if we do not found our belief upon divine atteftation. But Chriftianity renders us fit for a heavenly ftate. Anfwer: fo do the principles of the heathens. Chriftianity requires purity of heart, faith, refignation, and contempt of the world. Anfwer: fo did natural religion, as appears by many paffages in the writings of Cicero, and the maxims of the ftoics. No other religion, fays the Friend, has reprefented the Supreme Being in the character of three perfons united in one fubftance; or declared, that God is sometimes three Beings, and fometimes only one. The Rational Chriftian replies, Where do you find any fuch doctrine, that you give it as a proof of the divine origin of Christianity? The fcripture ufes no fuch language-When this point is determined, the dialogue goes on in this man

ner:

[ocr errors]

F. No other religion before Chriftianity ever attempted to reconcile the contingency of future events with the foreknowledge of God.

Ch. And where have you found the folution of this dif ficulty in fcripture? That God does foreknow future events is certain; but I never met with a text that offered to explain how this foreknowledge was confiftent with our free-will †.

Plato's Phæd. § 41. Cic. Som. Scipionis, &c.
+ See Crit. Rev. vol. xli, p. 469.
G. 2

F. No

F. No other ever attempted to fhew how the free-will of the creature was confiftent with the over-ruling grace of the Creator.

Ch. I can fee no difficulty in it, except you fuppofe the will of the creature be free, at the fame time that it is over-ruled; which is a contradiction in terms. But the fcripture never folves thefe questions, nor fuppofes thefe difficulties. They are all of our own making.

F. No other bas fo fully declared the neceffity of wickednefs and punishment; and yet fo effectually inftructed individuals, to refift the one and efcape the other.

Ch. If you mean that there is a neceffity for that wickednefs, which we are effectually intructed to escape, it is a contradiction. For either the wickedness is not neceffary, or else we cannot be effectually inflructed to escape it. And befices, if the wickedness be neceffary, the punishment must be not only unneceffary, but unjuft; for no one can be jully punished for what it is not in his power to prevent.

F. No other man has ever pretended to give an account of the depravity of man, or pointed out any remedy for it.

[ocr errors]

Ch. I imagine none of the heathen moralifts were infenfible of the imperfect (.e. the frail) nature of man. And I know of no actual depravity of nature but what has arifen from our. felves; for in whatever manner we account for the first fin, before our nature is fuppofed to be depraved, we may account for all that have been committed fince. The fouls of most men, Cicero fays, carry about them fome alloy, fcmething naturally mean, languid, and enervate; and did this conftiture the whole of our nature, man would be the most defpicable creature in the world but he has likewife reafon, the miftrefs, the queen of all his other powers; which by her natural force ftill makes advances and improvement, till the arrives at perfect virtue, or a conformity to right reafon." And what is this but a remedy against our imperfe&tions ? We are told indeed that there is in human nature a great propenfion to vice: but what is mean'd by this, except merely a propenfion to indulge those paffions, which God has implanted in us for wife and good purpofes? There is no fin in the propenfion, nor in the indulgence, but only in the excefs. Every virtue not governed by reafon, degenerates into vice.-But let it be fairly examined, whether there is not a greater propenfion to virtue: whether any man becomes greatly wicked without many struggles, or committed his first fins without regret at the time, and remorse afterwards-On the contrary, every virtuous action appears congenial to his nature; it is attended with unalloyed pleasure at the time, and unalloyed pleasure in the recollection. And whence come thefe fenfations, but from the ruling principle in our nature? and our fin confifts in nothing else but in acting contrary to this ruling principle; and it is impoffible that it fhould be agreeable to our nature to act contrary to the ruling principle of our na

ture.

ture.

However, the word nature, when we use it as relative to all men in refpect to their moral characters, is a vague term. What one man calls a natural vice, another looks upon as unnatural" to hurt any one for one's own benefit, fays Cicero, is more contrary to nature, than pain, than poverty, than death :" yet others may think it fo natural, that an external revelation is neceffary to prove it wrong. Every man therefore must judge of his own nature by his own feelings; and no man can answer for another man's nature For, as bishop Fowler afks, where fhall we find univerfal human nature, except in the finest headpieces of metaphyficians? However, if that word include our paffions, it must likewife include our understanding; and to lay our fins upon nature, feems to be the fame thing as if we laid them upon God himself, from whom we received our nature, But we may rest affured, that no man will be called to anfwer for any depravity, which cannot justly be imputed to

himself.

6

• F. No other hath ventured to declare the unpardonable nature of fin, without the influence of a mediatorial interpofition, and a vicarious atonement by the fufferings of a fuperior Being.

Ch. The fcripture declares no fuch thing. It informs us, in the Old Teftament, that God pardons penitent finners for his own fake, and in the New, that he pardons by or through a Mediator; but it never fays, that he could not have done it for his own fake at all times. Nor does it ever fpeak of fin, as a thing that is unpardonable without a vicarious atonement: this is all an invention of men, and a relict of paganifm; and was probably brought into Chriftianity by the heathen philofophers of the Alexandrian fchool, who had been used to fuch atonements before their converfion to Chriftianity.

F. That Chrift fuffered and died as an atonement for the fins of mankind, is a doctrine ftrongly and conilantly enforced thro' every part of the New Teftament.

Ch. But why do you perverfely understand an atonement to mean the punishment of an innocent perfon instead of the guilty? (a doctrine abfolutely inconfiftent with every notion of divine juftice, as you yourself confefs), when it may and must be underftood in the Jewish law to be made fometimes without any death at all, by water or oil, or an offering of flour. In short, whatever puts away enmity between two perfons, though the enmity be only on one fide, is in the fcriptural language an atonement, as it caufes a. reconciliation. And when Chrift declared the love of God to man, in offering a free pardon of fin to all, who would enter into his kingdom and obey his laws, and the gift of eternal life to his fincere fubjects; it was the knowledge of this love of God to mankind, manifested by the death of Chrift for our fakes, which put an end to that enmity and fufpicion of his good will, which had always before prevailed in the heathen world, and brought them over and recon.

G 3

ciled

« AnteriorContinuar »