SIR, Proceedings at Sunderland relating to Mr. Meadley's Monument. MY Y last communication, on the life and character of the late Mr. Meadley, [pp. 137-142,] concluded with an instance of general liberality which did honour to the town of Sunderland. What followed exhibited a portion at least of its inhabitants in a somewhat different light. Immediately after the funeral, a number of friends, of all parties, both in politics and religion, agreed to propose to the next monthly meeting of the committee of the Sunderland Library, "that a general meeting of the subscribers be called, for the purpose of obtaining their consent to the putting up in the Library, at the expense of a private subscription, a Tablet with an inscription thereon to the memory of the late Mr. Meadley." A notice was accordingly issued, and, on the 22d December, 1818, a general meeting was held, at which it was resolved, "That leave be given to such members of the Library as shall contribute to the expense thereof, to place in the Library-room a marble Tablet, with the inscription underneath, and now read, as a testimony of gratitude for the services rendered to this institution by the late Mr. Meadley." Inscription for a Tablet to be placed in the Sunderland Subscription Library, by a vote of a general meeting, December 22, 1818. To honour the memory and perpetuate the example of George Wilson Meadley, one of the founders of this Library, who died 28th November, 1818, in the 45th year of his age, this Marble was erected by the resolution to advance the welfare of this institution, which thus records its great and irreparable loss." No debate took place, nor was any objection urged to any part of the inscription. A ballot was demanded by the Rev. G. Stephenson, Rector of Redmarshall and Curate of BishopWearmouth, and the numbers were for it 25, against it 15. The tablet was shortly after erected, and immediate notice was given of an attack intended to be made against its continuance at the ensuing annual meeting, by the Rev. W. Ettrick, of High Barns, near Sunderland, author of a Treatise on the Millennium, and some other pieces of visionary theology, who proposed, in the form of a hand-bill, the disposal of a "valuable remain of antiquity, being a slab of delicate Parian marble lately arrived at this port," containing an inscription to "honour the memory and perpetuate the example of Cacodæmonius the Atomist, who publicly taught that there is no devil, and no future punishments." This was replied to by a plain series of extracts from Mr. Meadley's writings, proving that he was a sincere believer in the Divine ministry and mission of Christ, his death and consequent resurrection, the hope of immortality in the resurrection of the dead, and, most distinctly, in future punishments. Mr. Ettrick followed in a strain, if possible, more violent than before, to which Mr. Graham published a spirited reply. Next followed a temperate and judicious "Short Plea for Toleration," to which, and to a MS. address, which it appears Mr. Ettrick had received by the post, there came out from that gentleman's pen a torrent of filthy abuse, with any extracts from which I shall not ask you to defile your pages. Åt length the annual meeting arrives when the Rev. Dr. Gray, the successor to the liberal and enlightened Paley in the Rectory of Bishop-Wearmouth, appeared as a coadjutor to Messrs. Ettrick and Stephenson. Many hard words were uttered on Socinianism and other pernicious doctrines, political as well as religions, while the abettors of the tablet urged that they had nothing to do with either his politics or his religion, but with their obligations to him as members of that institution. In this discussion it was remarkable that the Rev. P. Wilcock, a Roman Catholic priest, distinguished himself on the liberal side. After a long and stormy debate, the votes were for maintaining the tablet 73, against it 43, on which Dr. Gray proposed, that the word as should be prefixed to the line," one of the founders of this library," to mark more distinctly the ground on which it was erected, which was immediately agreed to by Mr. Meadley's friends. Mr. Stephenson has since published his speech; and, subsequently, three Sermons which he has preached in Bishop-Wearmouth Church, on the Atonement, the Divinity of Christ, and the Deity and Personality of the Holy Spirit. And Dr. Gray, notwithstanding that the alteration proposed by himself was adopted, has since hung up in the Library-1 y-room the following protest: Copy of Dr. Gray's Protest against Mr. Meadley's Tablet. "To Dr. Pemberton. "MY DEAR SIR, "I shall be obliged to you, after having perused the accompanying letter, if you will take the proper measures for its being placed in the Library, and allowed to remain there one month. "I remain, my dear Sir, "Rectory, Feb. 8, 1819. "To the President and Members of the Sunderland Subscription Library. "GENTLEMEN, "At the anniversary meeting, on the 2d of February, I so far assented to the proposed alteration in the inscription on the tablet, (which in my opinion rendered it less objectionable,) as to say, that if it should be adopted, I would not print the protest which I intended to do, with the extracts which I read at the meeting, and the names of those gentlemen who might incline to sign it. It did not occur to me, in the confusion which prevailed, that such assent might hereafter be construed to imply my acquiescence in the decision of the meeting, by those who might not had made, That I should support Mr. Ettrick's motion for removing the tablet," and with the vote which I had actually given for it. It has therefore struck me, with painful and irresistible conviction, to be necessary to say, that I did not by any means intend to countenance this public tribute to the memory of the deceased; and with a view to exempt myself from any feeling or imputation of this nature, I must add, that I cannot any longer continue to be a member of a society, in which an eulogium, still open to great objections, however qualified, is holdeu up to public view, and stated to be so by the resolution of a general meeting of the subscribers,' to one, who has published opinions, which I do not wish to repeat, but which are in direct opposition to what our Saviour has plainly tanght us; since, with respect to his essential Deity and preexistence, he says, connect it with the declaration which I "I and my Father are one.' "I am in the Father, and the Father in me.' "He that hath seen me hath seen the Father.' "As the Father knoweth me, even so know I the Father.' "Before Abraham I am.' was, "And, a little before his crucifixion, in a prayer to God, he says, "And now, O Father, glorify me with thine own self, with the glory which I had with thee before the world was,' &c. &c. "With respect to the Atonement, the angel of the Lord declares of the Virgin, "She shall bring forth a Son, and thou shalt call his name Jesus, for he shall save his people from their sins.' "And the Evangelist adds, that "They shall call his name Immanuel, which is, being interpreted, God with us.' "Jesus himself says, "I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever, and the bread which I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world." "And the Baptist said, when he saw Jesus coming unto him, "Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.' "And it appears from all Scripture, that Christ is "The Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.' "With regard to the distinct personality of the Holy Spirit, Christ thus commands his disciples, "Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.' "And he declares the distinct personality of the Holy Ghost, by promising to send him as Another Comforter.' "And by saying, "The Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.' "In declining, therefore, (which I now do with unfeigned regret,) to act upon your committee and in withdrawing myself from the Library, I solemnly declare that I would not have adopted these measures, if I did not consider them as indispensably requisite to the maintenance of that veneration which I owe to my Redeemer, and to the Holy Spirit of God, as well as to the Father; to one holy and undivided Trinity. Deeming it, also, peculiarly incumbent upon me, in the relation I bear to many of the members of this institution, and in the regard which I feel for the welfare of all, thus explicitly to declare my sentiments, "I am, Gentlemen, "With my best wishes, &c. "ROBERT GRAY. "Rectory, Bishop-Wearmouth, 8th Feb. 1819." On which the following Remarks have been published: "Remarks on the Rev. Dr. Gray's Pro- "GENTLEMEN, "The existence of one God, by whom all things were created; the Divine Mission, Death, and consequent Resurrection of Christ; the Divine Authority of his Precepts, revealed in the Gospel; and the hope of Immortality in the Resurrection of the Dead.' "It is true he states, in the same Letter, pp. 10 and 12, that the separate existence and divinity of Three Persons in One God,' does not appear to him to be explicitly revealed in Scripture; and that he believes in the atonement only as signifying the means and method of reconciliation of mankind to God through faith in Christ and obedience to his precepts. But these opinions,' he would have been well able to shew, are by no means 'in direct opposition' to the texts which Dr. Gray has quoted, all of which he as firmly believed as the Doctor; only he read them in connexion with the accompanying passages, and not in the insulated way in which the Doctor has given them to his readers. "For instance, he believed as firmly as the Doctor, that Jesus and his Father are one,' (John x. 30,) not one and the same intelligent agent, but, one in unity of design and purpose. This can surely be doubted by none who attentively consider the context. After having, in the former part of the chapter, likened himself to a good shepherd, ready, in case of danger from robbers, to sacrifice even his life for his flock, he says, my Father, who gave me them, is greater than all, and no man is able to pluck them out of my Futher's hand: I and my Father are one."' The Jews, indeed, attending, like Dr. Gray, only to these last words, took up stones to stone him, because he, being a man, made himself God. Now, if this had really been his meaning, what would have been more natural for him than to admit the inference? But instead of this, what is his reply? Is it not written in your law, I have said, ye are gods?' 'If those be called gods to whom the word of God came, say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified and sent into the world, 'thou blasphemest,' because he said, 'I am the Son of God?' If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not; but if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works, that ye may know and believe that the Father is in me, and I in him.' But as if with a view to render his meaning in these words perfectly clear, he explains it in the most solemn and interesting manner in that inimitable prayer for his disciples, and for all his followers to the end of the world (see John xvii. 11 and 20): 'Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are. Neither pray for these alone, but for all those who shall believe on me through their word; that they all may be one, as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they all may be I one in us; that the world may believe that thon hast sent me.' "That this was a customary phraseology in the sacred writings, see 1 Cor. iii. 8: Now he that planteth and he that watereth are one-united in interest, design and affection. Turn also to Gen. xli. 25, where, after Pharaoh had related his two dreams, Joseph says, the dream of Pharaoh is one;' that is, the two dreams signify the same thing. 6 "It will be scarcely necessary, after what has been said, to trouble you with many observations on the next three texts; which only convey the general important doctrine, the ground of Mr. Meadley's consolation and hope, emphatically expressed by himself, as his friends recollect with pleasure, in the severity of his last sickness, that the Lord Jesus acted in all things, and will act in all things to the end, by authority and commission from the Father "his would indeed have been evident to you all, if Dr. Gray had vouchsafed to on with his quotation from John xii. 9, to the end of the 10th verse: He that hath seen me bath seen the Father; and how sayest thou, shew us the Father? Believest thou not that I am in the Father and the ather in me? The words which I speak unto you, I speak not of myself; but the Father who dwelleth in me, he doth the works.' See also verses 49, 50. The same observation will apply to the term Immanuel, quoted by the Doctor, under his second class of texts; and to every passage in which the Lord Jesus is represented as the medium of the manifestation of the goodness and power of God. "The next text, which the Doctor quotes, is intended by him to prove the pre-existence of Jesus Christ John viii. 50: Before Abraham was, I am.' In the former part of the chapter we find our Saviour disputing with the prejudiced and bigoted Jews, who, on his promising to those who believed in him · that they should be made free,' replied with indig nation, that they were Abraham's seed, and were never in bondage to any man.' Jesus explains to them that the slavery to which he referred was the slavery of sin, from which he came to set them free. On their re-asserting their privileges as Abraham's seed, Jesus assigns to the dispositions they manifested a very different origin, I speak that which I have seen of my Father, and ye do that which ye have seen with your Father;' by which we are no more authorized to understand him as asserting, that he was existing in a former state a separate and distinct being from the Father, than we can suppose him to mean that the Jews had pre-existed, and literally seen the devil doing any thing, but-alluding to that sure and satis factory knowledge which men receive by ocular inspection-that he had the most certain knowledge of the will of God, that will which God gave him to reveal to mankind, and which is perfectly just and true, proceeding from God; just as all things bad and false are said to proceed from the devil. 6 "After much captious and prejudiced altercation, in the course of his replies to which, our Saviour charges them with 'seeking to kill him, a man that had told them the truth which he had heard from God, this,' says he, did not Abraham;' on the contrary, he rejoiced to see my day, and he saw it, and was glad.' He saw his day, not himself in a pre-existent state. The Jews, however, maliciously perverting his words, reply, thou art noć yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham ? Our Lord had never mentioned seeing Abraham, but spoke of Abraham seeing his day, that is, the gospel times, in which it was expressly revealed to Abraham, (Gen. xxii. 18,) all nations should be blessed in his seed.' He therefore answers them, not according to their perverted construction, but according to the true and obvious meaning of his own words, and tells them, that Abraham both might, and did, see his day, for that before Abraham was he was-in 'he counsels of the Almighty, who revealed his mission to Abraham; before whom, even 'from the foundation of the world,' the Lord Jesus was appointed to be the Word of God to men. "What has been said will explain our Lord's meaning in Dr Gray's next quotation, from the prayer which he offered up, a little before his crucifixion, to his Father and our Father, to his God and our God.' He had finished, he says, the work which God had given him to do, and he now prays, (John xvii. 5,) that God would glorify him with the glory which he had with him before the world was.' If these words are supposed to refer to glory which had been already enjoyed by him, as another and different being from the Father in a state prior to this, how could it be considered as a reward? But if we consider this glory as existing in the Divine counsels, and appointed for him from the beginning, but conferred on him in the fulness of time, when he had finished the work which was given him, we have then a very clear and consistent notion of his exaltation to the right hand of God, of his being constituted the Head over all things to his church, of his coming again in glory to judge the world, and of his being appointed to this high office because he is the Son of Man.' "Other similar expressions are in Matt. xxv. 34, where the kingdom is said to be prepared for the blessed from the foundation of the world;' in John xvii. 24, where God is said to have loved Christ from the foundation of the world; in Ephes. i. 4, where the faithful are said to have been chosen in him from the foundation of the world;' in 1 Peter i. 30, where Christ is said to have been foreordained from the foundation of the world.' But Dr. Gray himself has helped us to the true key to all these passages, by quoting from Rev. xiii. 8, the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. This must have been only in the Divine decree or purpose; for the Lamb was not actually slain till at least 4035 years after. 6 "The next class of texts is said to contain declarations in favour of the doctrine of atonement. If Dr Gray takes this word in its original meaning of at-one-ment, reconciliation of sinful men, who were at enmity with God by wicked works, to a state of acceptance with him through repentance, faith and better obedience, Mr. M. would have had no other dispute with the Doctor, as to its use, than that, in its modern and more usual signification, it means an equivalent price paid to God to reconcile Him to man; an idea which, though expressly taught in the Articles of the Church of England, is no where to be found in the New Testament. On the contrary, the whole gospel scheme is a scheme of mercy, proposed from God by Jesus Christ, whom God hath set forth to be a propitiatory,' or mercy-seat, to declare unto his people, being penitent, the remission of their sins. And in this sense he was properly said to save his. people from their sins: all such as believe in him are freed from the effect of them. God having sent him to preach remission upon repentance, such as accepted this condition were saved, taken out of the danger they were in, and put into a safe state; and, if they lived as they ought for the future, they were to be finally happy. Now Jesus, being the person by whom all this was to be accomplished, was said to save them from their sins by taking them away, just as he took (away) their infirmities, and bore (off) their sicknesses, as Matthew (viii. 17) explains Isaiah liii. 4, by quoting this prophecy in illustration of our Saviour's miracles of healing. "Dr. Gray next quotes one of the most figurative passages in a highly figurative and obscure discourse delivered by our Lord to a set of persons, who, having experienced his bounty in having been miraculously fed, continued to follow him with narrow and selfish views, and whom he wishes to draw to the pursuit of that food which perisheth not, or that divine doctrine which he came from God to teach. In a similar manner, in his discourse with the woman of Samaria, he had called his doctrine water, (in allusion to the object of her visit to the well;) and he cautions his disciples to beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, by which he expressly gives them to understand that he meant, not bread, but the doctrine of these unrighteous teachers. In this verse there are two figures, first bread and then flesh; the first representing the doctrine which he was sent to preach; the second his life, which he was to lay down for the life of the world, in the execution of his divine commission to bring life and immortality to light. It would carry me beyond the limits of a short paper such as this, to go through the whole of this very figurative discourse; but it may be observed that, in explaining it afterwards to his disciples, he says, It is the Spirit that quickeneth, the flesh profiteth nothing; the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit and they are life;' i. e. My meaning has been entirely spiritual, and it is only the spiritual meaning of the figurative expressions which I have employed that can be of any effect to lead you to eternal life. To eat my flesh literally would be of no use to you; it is the word that I speak to you, my doctrine, that is the true spirit and meaning of what I have been describing. It is this alone on which men can live in a spiritual and proper sense.' With regard to the two texts quoted to prove the distinct personal existence of the Holy Spirit, the present writer has nothing to add to what is already so well said by Mr. Meadley, concerning the com- / only supposed form of baptism, (Matt. xxviii. 20,) in his Letters, I. p. 10; II. p. 31. With regard to Christ's promise of a Comforter, (John xvii. 26,) he would first intreat you to consider carefully the appeal of St. Paul to the Corinthians, (1 Epist. ii. 10,) What man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of the man which is in him, even so knoweth no man the things of God, except the Spirit of God; that is, as no man knoweth his thoughts and intentions but the man himself, so none knoweth the designs of God but God himself. Under this guidance, he humbly presumes to believe that the Holy Spirit of God is not a distinct being, but truly and properly God himself, acting, in this instance, by the mighty power which fell on the apostles on the day of Pentecost, at the intercession of the Lord Jesus; and, in short, under whatever character represented, whether as a witness to the Son, as a guide to truth, or a comforter in the day of temptation and trial, is of the essence of God the Father Almighty. Whether it be wisdom, knowledge, faith, prophecy, miracles, the gifts of healing, or divers kinds of tongues, it is the same God which worketh all in all.' |