תמונות בעמוד
PDF
ePub

the fold, grapes from the vine, and spiritual ideas from the revelation of God. Did not these analogies exist, our Saviour would not have borrowed his illustrations from parents and children, from quickning and being born, from the plant and the vine, from the earth and its fruits, from sowing and reaping, from bread and water, from life and death, from nature and society.

But here is the folly of our opponents: they tell us that they cannot explain how any one is born of the Spirit, and yet condemn us for not receiving and teaching their theory! Reader, remember this.

[ocr errors]

"

ANDREW BROADDUS, HIS DILEMMAS, AND HIS GOSPEL

OF THE SPIRIT. But we shall, from the aforesaid Religious Herald, introduce Andrew Broaddus under his title of “Christianos," with his dilemmas and his reductio ad absurdum:

“1. We shall now place the advocates of this sentiment in a dilemma, from wbich we think they can find no way to escape:

"It is admitted that faith must precede baptism, otherwise baptism is of no avail. Now this faith either “works by love,” or it does not. If it does not work by love, then, not only is it wanting in validity, according to the Apostle's representation, but then must the subject be baptized without any love to Jesus Christ, and so must be under the apostolic anathema. Here, then, is one horn of the dilemma. If this faith does work by love, then the subject loves Jesus Christ before he is baptized (which certainly he ought to do;) and love being the very essence of religion, he must have a holy spirit before he is baptized; and whence comes this holy spirit, if, as yet the Holy Spirit has not been imparted to him? Here is the other horn of the dilemma. Now, candid reader, is not the advocate for the sentiment above mentioned enclosed between these two horns?

"s2. We shall reduce the argument or sentiment to an absurdity. And here we shall use what logicians call the argumentum ad hominem, or take the advocates of the sentiment on their own ground.

"The holy spirit which believers receive is derived, it seems, merely from the word,- or from imbibing the truth. This is all the Holy Spirit that they plead for. Now can a person truly repent and unfeignedly believe in Jesus Christ, without streceiving the love of the truth," or the truth in the love of it? Surely not. Well, then, the penitent believer receives the word, by which only the Holy Spirit, or a holy spirit, can be received; and yet before baptism he has received no holy spirit with it-be has received it as a dead letter” aye, as a dead letter: but after baptism he receives, in the same word, the Holy Spirit. Mirabile dictu! If this be not glaring inconsistency-downright ab. surdity-I would fain know wbat is so?”

We shall test this dilemma by applying it to its inventor's theory. We shall regard the mechanism of its horns with all logical accuracy. It is argued that the Spirit must precede faith, i. e. must enter the heart of an unbeliever and operate upon it, otherwise faith is of no avail. Now this spirit either works by the truth or it does not. If it does not work by the truth, then not only is its work wanting in holiness according to the Saviour's representation, but then must the subject believe without any truth to be believed, and so must como under the Saviour's condemnation-"He that believeth not the gospel shall be condemned." Here, then, is one horn of the dilemma. If this spirit does work by the truth, then the subject knows or has received the truth before he believes, (which certainly is a very singular proposition.) and the truth (or gospel) being the very substance of faith, he must have faith before he believes. Here is the other horn of the dilemma. Now, candid friend Broaddus, are not you the advocate of such a sentiment, "enclosed between these horns.” These, too, are not horns of wax, like those you have wrought for others, These horns will not be melted by a touch of the fire of truth like those fancy horns which your fervid imagination has fashioned for a terror to the inquisitive. These waxen horns are dissolved when it is understood That there is no faith working by love, but that which is leading the soul forward in obedience, or that no one can truly love the Saviour whose soul is not following him in all the obedience of the truth, The love, then, as well as the peace of mind tasted before the overt act, is always co-existent with, or subsequent to, the determination to act. The case of Simon Extra, No.3, p. 20.] who is reprieved on condition of a stipulated act, might have saved the labor of forming this dilemma had its creator been mindful of what he there read.

But this dilemma, in its second horn, is as perfect a quibble as ever made a jury smile: for who can imagine a faith working by love before it works at all? The faith of friend Broaddus, by which he was justified on his theory, never worked either by love or fear until he was justified! for if he had been justified by a faith working by any principle, he would not have been justified by grace, John Calvin being judge. What sophisms do some zealous-minded disciples construct when they set about making dilemmas to entangle the unwary and to allure them from those whom they cannot meet on the book!

But once more on this dilemma, and the absurditv, by way of makereicht, added to it. His assumption is false; for we do not affirm *that all the holy spirit for which we plead is derived merely from the word." He is then fighting with a chimera of his own creation. We contend that our heavenly faiher gives his Holy Spirit to them who submit to the government of his Son. But, inasmuch as Andrew cannot explain how any man is born of the Spirit according to his favorite text, The wind bloweth," &c. how dare he condemn any, thing we have said or written on the subject!!! We say that no person can enter into the kingdom unless born of the Spirit, He says so too. But he says he cannot tell how one is born of the Spirit as he cannot tell whence the wind comes or goes.

The consolations of the gospel of the Holy Spirit preached' by Bishop Broaddus, appear to be the following:

Article 1. No man can believe unless the Holy Spirit work faith in his heart.

2. The Spirit works faith only in the hearts of a very few of them who hear the gospel.

3. In these few it works by no other system than arbitrary choice.

4. If the unbeliever ask for the Spirit, he is not to be heard nor regarded; for without faith it is impossible to please God.

5. If he read the Scriptures he cannot understand them, for they are spiritually discerned,

Corollary.---Every natural man is by this gospel of the Spirit comforted with the peradventure, that perhaps it marie nis good fate to be one of those in whom the Spirit will work faith; and if not, he must stoically await his doom. This is our reductio ad absurdum of his theory of what he cannot explain. And with this we shall bid him adieu for the present, waiting for his solution of this quillemma.

EDITOR.

For the Millennial Harbinger.

KING & QUEEN, January 30, 1832, Brother Campbell,

THE particular design of this communication is to correct your notice of the case of suicide, published in the December number of the Harbinger. The report, as it now stands, may lead to unfavorable impressions, and ought to be, in any event, corrected. The brother of whom you received information, was doubtless unacquainted with the facts of the case, else the mistakes existing in the report would not have been made. In these days it is no easy matter to get at the trath upon subjects of common report.

Mr. -- never presented himself for membership to any church in King William, nor withdrew from any appointed immersion. These are the mistakes of the report, (the balance being substantially correct, as alledged to me by his brother-in-law, a truly respectable disciple,) and will be corrected when I have stated that he presented himself for admission to the First Baptist Church in Richmond, and would have been there baptized, without any objection that we know of, but for the circumstance of his suddenly leaving town. His mind became affected, and seemed to dwell more particularly upon his religious exercises than usual; and he would speak of the effects of the different methods of proclaiming the gospel, and the improprieties into which he had fallen while detailing before the church a long experience; declaring, as his friend informed me, that if he had heard the ancient gospel only, he should not so have sinned, but been a happy man. These things may be considered by some as the mere figments of a maniac's fancy; be it so: but all who knew him well. will probably admit that he was a young man of acute sensibility, and upon the subject of religion would be as likely as not to suffer from discordant teaching. I conversed with him not long before he went to Richmond, and from what was to be learned from himself or others, he appeared to be a firm believer in the Saviour, but apologized for his disobedience by urging his desire to obtain some extraordinary manifestation of the divine favor? Fatal teaching! It seems to me that the funeral fires of Brahina are less destructive of the great interests of immortal souls, than is the influence of this doctrine as commonly inculcated in christendom. The very best classes of society are, hy its legitimate operation, made to suffer most largely. The moral man is made to wait and look, and look and wait, until he learns fairly to live without God in the world, or is thrown into fren

zy; while the man of high intelligence, equally disappointed, turns away from the only “rock in'a weary land," and seeks a shelter under the gourd vine” of reason! May God speed the day when all who are so far under the divine influence as to be able to say that "Jesus is the Christ,” and are willing to take up their cross and follow him, shall be counted worthy of an admission into his earthly, kingdom!

We have had the pleasure in this quarter of a visit from your venerable father. Though his head be hoary, his heart seems still warm under the benign influence of the Sun of Righteousness. We trust that the Lord will do great things by him. While he makes manifest the truth to the opposer, he inculcates, by his deportment and his teaching, the necessity of prudence, meekness, temperance, patience, (as our Lord had long ago taught,) among the friends of reform. How good it is thus to be admonished and instructed! As little as I am thought by some to regard "unity among brethren," yet I must be so contrary as to say, that its charms and its blessings are unspeakable! To see the congregations of Christ at rest upon the immutable foundation of revelation, is at once to embrace the wishes of christians in reference to the happiness of Zion on the one hand, and the grand overthrow of the prince of the power of the air" on the other. But these objects, so devoutly to be wished, cannot be attained without a general unity of heart, head, and hand; nor this last without the sanctifying influence and control of the word of God.

It seems to me that a ternporary separation must extensively affect the Baptist congregations, but that a final happy and permanent union, constituting the nucleus of all future true enlargement, will be formed upon the basis of the New Testament. It further appears to me that this state of things does not constitute a schism of the body of Christ, since the idea of a schism must necessarily include both a separation from each other, and a departure also from God the doing of something in violation of his revealed will concerning us. As to ourselves (christians) it seems likewise to embrace a principle of practical alienation that will clearly violate the laws of love and all good fellow-feeling. Are these things true of those who are now contending, as they avow, for “the faith once delivered to the saints ?" If these ranklings of carnality are cherished by us, it is high time to turn our hand within to the work of eradication; “Physician, heal thyself,” should be a daily motto with us. But are we not ready and willing to salute those who oppose us as christian brethren--believe them to be so-invite and cordially unite with them around the table of our common Lord? But have we not hard feelings towards some who oppose us, and occasionally speak harshly of them? Many of us I am sure will plead guilty here. We have all thought and spoken unadvisedly of our brethren. In a state of society, such as we now witness, it is almost impossible to avoid talking much of each other as parties and as individuals. The parties effect their designs through the instrumentality of individuals; and it is from one to the other we are constantly compelled to advert in our private circles. And here it is particularly that we contribute our quantumn of that gigantic lever which turns the destinies of countries, and more especially such as ours; I mean public opinion. This truly is a treasure to any people; but the people of God ought to be prudent in the exercise of a right in a wrong way; in other words, be cautious lest we speak unadvisedly while we speak even unavoidably. But there is one evil existing in this controversy, deeply to be lamented hy every good man. It is by no means confined to yourself. We are generally, as well as your. self, misunderstood by all who have not troubled themselves to be correctly informed, (this is natural enough, but a large number prima fess to be informed correctly, and yet misrepresent us upon crcry point in dispute! When this course was first taken up, believing our brethren to be good men, particularly those who took the lead in this quarter, for one, I confidently predicted that when their mistakes were denied and corrected, as good men they would cease to reiterate them. But contradiction was succeeded by explanation, and this by Scripture assertion and illustration, entirely in vain. Face to face have we denied, defended, and explained, to no purpose-the same old tale of "no divine influence”-“no living faith"--"no change of heart"(not noticing the difference between change of place, for which they seem to think we contend, and change of state,)— he perfect sufficiency of water alone,” &c. is often told, clothed not unfrequentwith insinuations and inuendoes. Can I say, "Forgive them; they know not what they do?" Our civil code would not excuse such a course; and is the righteousness of God, as laid down in his word, a lower standard? Can a man be justifiable in doing wrong, who is warned, and then furnished with every necessary mean and motive for doing right? But it is an unavoidable effect upon the heart of those thus misrepresented, that we are made to deplore. Our brethren, by this perverse course, force us into a low estimate of their virtue. What! a christian repeat that report of his brother, (which that brother has denied again and again,) and that too to the injury of his fellow-christian! Under such circumstances, where is the charity tbat would impose upon me the necessity of believing thistles to be figs? This state and such effects are greatly to be lamented. Should we not endeavor to be more clear, if possible, in the ground occu nied by us, clearing our way, as far as practicable, of all difficulties? The time in which we live is truly trying. A great prize awaits us should we fight a good battle. Of one thing I feel certain--we need the whole armor of the christian, not omitting the comforting promise, "I will not leave you orphans."

Instead of a very short letter, which I designed, I find myself at the end of quite a long one. With the best wishes for your temporal and spiritual welfare, I remain yours truly,

J, DU VAL,

For the Millennal Harbinger,

KING & Queen, February, 1832. Brother Campbell,

THE Saviour, in that prayer which is presented to us in the 17th chapter of John's testimony, makes the following an item; . VOL. 111.

14

« הקודםהמשך »