Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

"What sayeth my friend Mr. Smyly and his law Church! Absti nence from meats is the doctrine of devils and the suggestion of the spirit of lies.

"What sayeth Christ by the lips of the Apostle of nations? He that marrieth doeth well, but he that marrieth not doeth better. She who is married mindeth the things how she may please her husband; she who leads a single life careth for those things how she may please her God and save her own soul, and she is not divided.

"What sayeth the Rev. Mr. Smyly and his law Church? Whosoever marrieth not doeth evil; a vow of celibacy solemnly made before God and before man is not worthy of notice; he that breaks it performs a meritorious act, while he who keeps it sinneth.

"What sayeth Christ! If you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments; faith without charity availeth nothing; love the Lord thy God with thy whole heart, and thy neighbor as thyself; do this and thou shalt live.

"What sayeth the Rev. Mr. Smyly and his law Church? Believe and you shall be saved, for by faith alone you are justified."

On both sides the most obsequious courtesy, backed with the most decided self-reliance, or reliance on the cause espoused, was exhibited. As evidence, we may give Mr. Collis's closing remarks on the third day of the discussion.

“My Roman Catholic friends, if we could only, by the Spirit of God, put this truth into your hearts; if we could get you to lean on Jesus Christ, and him alone, for salvation; if we could get you to confide solely in that blood which cleanseth from all sin, then would your fondly invented, expiating purgatory go to the wind, and we should hear no more of the sacrifice of the mass, indulgences, extreme unction, prayers for the dead, and those other fond things unchristianly introduced, and which have no foundation or warranty in the Word of God; then would there be an end of these and such like discussions among you forever. The doctrine of justification by faith alone, in the atoning righteousness of right, I now then propose, as the great feature and bulwark of Protestantism, in contradistinction to the doc

trine of human merit, works of supererogation, &c., as taught by the Church of Rome. I say that we Protestants put no trust in good works, as tending to justify the sinner, or to assist the atoning righteousness of the Saviour; why, sir, should we endeavor to light up the poor farthing taper of human merit, where we have the Sun of Righteousness shining in meridian brightness in the Gospel.

"The golden beams of the great luminary of nature are now shining resplendent upon us, could we think of assisting the illumination, by putting a lighted taper on our table here? would any of us think of holding up a candle to the sun? But it may be said that by such statement of this doctrine, do we not open the door to licentiousness and immorality?—I deny that we do; for the Protestant doctrine is, that the Spirit that gives faith also sanctifies; justification and sanctification go hand in hand in the Protestant system. Protestants do not look upon any as possessing the faith that justifies, unless this faith produces holiness. Such, then, are some of the leading and characteristic doctrines of Protestantism; such are the striking features and differences of the two churches; and I now appeal to you as thinking, rational, wise men, which of them should be considered as the true Church of Christ, and which, as that which is schismatieal and heretical, and which has departed from the faith once delivered to the saints. I would now narrow the whole question within this one point: The Apostle Paul wrote an Epistle to the Romans. There was, my friends, a Church of Rome in Paul's day; not, indeed, the Church of Rome as she exists and is constituted now-for, alas! "how has the gold become dim, how is the much fine gold changed?" The Church of Rome now-a-days existing has departed, we Protestants strenuously maintain, from the faith as preached to the Church of Rome by Paul in his day. We Protestants will be satisfied to build our whole doctrine on the Epistle of Paul to the Romans in his day; and we declare that if we had only this one Epistle, we could derive therefrom what would refute Popery, and give the saving knowledge of the truth, as it is in Christ Jesus, to the soul.

66

If Popery stand the test of this Epistle, and if Protestantism doth not stand it, we shall give up the question.

"To confirm and establish my positions here, I shall now beg leave to give a rapid outline of this Epistle, leaving it to your judgment, as scripturally enlightened, to determine whether my view of the Epistle be correct or not.

"The great design of the Apostle in the Epistle to the Romans, is to show the need all mankind had of a righteousness to justify, the nature of that righteousness which justifies a sinner, and the consequences and results of embracing aud laying hold of such justifying righteous ness; accordingly, in the first chapter the Apostle is principally occupied in showing that the Gentile world, by reason of their horrid wickedness and total moral apostacy, had need of this righteousness. In the second chapter and the opening part of the third chapter, he shows that the Jews, though possessed of greater external privileges, were just in as bad a way as to the attainment of anything like a personal justifying righteousness before God. In the latter part of the third chapter, he explains at large what that righteousness is which justifies the sinner; even the righteoueness of Jesus Christ-his perfect obedience unto death, as God manifest in the flesh, and which, being embraced by faith by the sinner, becomes his by imputation. In the fourth chapter Paul proves or evidences his doctrine by the case of Abraham as the father of the faithful, or the justified. In the fifth chapter he shows the consequence of embracing this doctrine, as relates to inward Christian experience, or the communication of peace, and joy, and hope to the believer. In the sixth chapter Paul shows that this blessed doctrine does not tend to licentiousness, as might at first sight appear, and as its enemies have ofttimes represented, but one directly and necessarily tending unto holiness of life. In the seventh chapter he shows that the justified are renewed in the right spirit of their minds, yet are they, at best, but renewed in part; that in the most regenerate there is, through life, a perpetual conflict kept up between the flesh and spirit. But though sin thus harrasses and oppresses them, yet doth it not condemn them, for they obtain the victory over the body of this death through Jesus Christ; so that, as is said in the opening part of the eighth chapter, there is now no condemnation, and therefore no Purgatory, &c., for them that are in Jesus Christ, and who walk not after the flesh, but after the spirit. (Rom. viii. 1, &c.)"

Strictly speaking, we have only to do with Mr. Maginn, and to his part of the controversy we shall confine our extracts.

On the fourth day Mr. Maginn, "lest his reverend

friends should want employment during the remainder of the day," proposed to them the following list of objections:

"QUERIES.-First: How can the receiving of the tenths of the poor man's labor, be reconciled with that principle which is considered as fundamental in the Church of England, viz. :-That every man is capable of judging, and should judge for himself, on all occasions in religious matters? be your Secondly: If the Bible, interpreted by individual reason, sole rule of faith, why saddle us with the galling burthen of pampered and avaricious preachers and ministers ?

66

[ocr errors]

Thirdly: If Protestants of all denominations be one, as Mr. Smyly has stated, why brand with the name of schismatic, the Dissenter true to his principles ?

"Fourthly: If Protestants of all denominations be one in faith, in hope, and charity, why set up conventicles apart? Why do they wor ship in different temples?

[ocr errors]

Fifthly In the name of common sense, how can you assert that any man differing from you in opinion, is wrong-you, who admit that every man is right in judging for himself in matters of faith?

"Sixthly On what principle would you refute an Arian or Socinian, who taking private judgment and Scripture for his sole guide, would interpret the following texts :- There is one Mediator, the man Christ Jesus,' or 'my Father is greater than I;' of the non-consubstantiality or inferiority of the Son?

66

Seventhly: How can you reconcile the universal apostacy of Christendom, as it is asserted in your Book of Homilies, with this perpetual truth-the unchanageable object in the symbol of a Christian's faith, viz. I believe in the Holy Catholic Church;' or, as it is in the Nicene Creed, 'I believe in one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church?"

Eightly The articles which separate you from your Presbyterian brethren, and from the Dissenters of all denominations-they are either essentials or non-essentials. If essentials, why have you the absurdity to state that you are one with them? If non-essentials, why, therefore, 'n the name of heaven, divide the peaceable inhabitants of the City of Sion? Why tear the seamless garment of Christ asunder, by causing hem for a non-adhesion to indifferent and nugatory articles, to retire

branded with the name of excommunicated from your law Church— 'Whosoever shall separate themselves from the communion of the Saints, as it is approved by the Apostles' rules in the Church of England, and combine themselves in a new brotherhood, accounting the Christians who are conformable to the doctrines, government, rites, and eeremonies in the Church of England, to be profane and unmeet for them to join with in Christian profession, let them be excommunicated, &c.'-(Canon 9th.)

"Tenthly: Why do you admit a supreme head in spirituals, whose supremacy is not sanctioned by any warrant in the written Christian dispensation?

66

Eleventhly: Why do you say, as you have said, that Scripture bears testimony to itself, when its author, Christ Jesus, says, that even his own living and established testimony of himself would be fruitless and vain. 6 If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true-you sent to John, and he gave testimony of the truth?'-(St. John, chap. 5, *ver. 31 and 33.)

"How do you prove to this mixed assembly, that you are not guilty of the sin of Schism-a sin which the Apostle of nations testifies, excludes from the kingdom of heaven-equally guilty, I repeat it, with the Arians, the Nestorians, the Euticheans. They also called themselves Reformers of the Church of Christ. They also separated themselves from the See of Rome. What they have done, you have done in like manner?-So much for the Queries."

On these queries the subsequent discussion mainly turned. On the fifth day, Mr. Maginn gave utterance to the following noble words, in reply to the pseudo-prophecy that the Church would shortly perish:

"My friend Mr. Smyly has told us that the Catholic Church, viz, the whore of Babylon, will shortly perish. In this prophetic cry of his, I recognize the language of the seers of past ages: The Catholic Church, says a Simon Magus, shall shortly perish, for she denies that the Holy Ghost can be purchased for money. The Catholic Church shall shortly perish,' says a Menander, for she is so absurd as to teach that I am not the light for the revelations of nations, nor the glory of

« AnteriorContinuar »