Images de page
PDF
ePub

inclinations, and endeavours of the long life of which God in his great mercy hath favoured me, than to spread the word of God in every quarter, so that all, from the least to the greatest, 'may know God, and Jesus Christ whom he hath sent.' In a great measure, the matter is ill understood by many. Questions have been raised, as if the distribution of the Bible itself was reprobated. I trust, my brethren, that the whole tenor of our lives, yours as well as mine, has already proved that we have never entertained one thought of the kind. It is the mode of doing it, and the effects of it, which have been called in question. A thing may be right in the main view of its nature and purpose, but may become wrong and detrimental from the injudicious use which may be made of it. Here it is that well-disposed persons, not to mention others, often differ so that it is difficult so to deliver one's sentiments, as not to awaken at least, if not to give, fresh point to the difference of opinion, which may have been formed.

:

"Still with this sense of difficulty before me, it would ill become me, holding so high a situation in the church, to suppress my thoughts, or to hesitate one moment about giving you my opinions upon this interesting subject. This I

should have done at our last meeting, most fully, had I been aware that such a plan had been in agitation: but it was kept concealed from me, and from all those with whom I am accustomed to communicate upon the official business of the diocess, till just after our last meeting was closed. This, therefore, I would wish now to do, without being thought to point at any one amongst us, or to use one single word which might reasonably give offence or provocation. Indeed, I have already given my opinion in all the conversations, and at all the private opportunities which have been offered me. With out equivocation, therefore, or least disguise, I feel it incumbent upon me now publicly to declare, that I cannot allow myself to join any of the Bible Societies which have been planted so numerously in the various parts of our kingdom and that, for these plain reasons, among others :-because I do not think that they are calculated to introduce purer notions of religion, than we have at present; or to increase the understanding of the Scriptures, beyond what our present means will do; and, certainly, because I do not think

the

that they are calculated to promote our Ecclesiastical Establishment, or the quiet of it, both which we all profess to maintain.

"It is now needless to go into all the points which relate to the Bible Society, as though it were a new subject, upon which any fresh information of consequence could be given. The subject has been discussed in popular meetings and various publications, throughout the whole kingdom; so that the Society, its great wealth, its plans, and modes of operation, are completely before the public; and it must have its course; and all ranks of people must satisfy themselves, with respect to all the observations which have been made upon it. I cannot consider it as the special and exclusive duty of the clergy, under all these circumstances, (for they may be better employed in cautionary measures,) to labour to stop its progress : indeed, they could not if they would; for it is in a manner placed above our reach.

"But although we cannot do all that we could desire, and prevent the minds of our people from being disturbed by the introduction of this method of dispersing the word of God, what forbids that we should cautiously watch what is going forward; should observe the fears of many well-disposed persons who have taken an alarm; and should try to adopt such measures as we think likely to quiet any apprehensions; or to supply any thing which may be wanting; or to remedy any thing wrong which may have been introduced?

"The first thing which seemed unintelligible to the friends of the Establishment was, how the lower orders of our people, by merely possessing a Bible, could gain any understanding of the true scriptural meaning of various parts of the holy Scriptures, without having at the same time, some guide or help by which they might obtain that knowledge which they sought. It is not the mere possession of a treasure, which makes a man rich, but the knowledge and spirit how to make use of it. It is evident, that when Christ introduced his Gospel, he thought it necessary to communicate to certain of his disciples, the true interpretation of the many abstruse prophecies which relate to himself, of which till that moment they had no conception at all. Thus, Lactantius speaks of this circumstance: Profectus ergò (Jesus) in Galilæam, discipulis iterùm congregatis, Scripturæ Sanctæ literas; id est, Prophetarum arcana

patefecit, quæ antequam pateretur, perspici nullo modo poterant, quia ipsum passionemque ejus annuntiabant.' Lactant. Instit. Lib. iv. cap. xx. And afterwards, in the Apostolical Age, Philip is sent to the Ethiopian Eunuch, to show him the spirituality of the Prophecies of Isaiah, and the general doctrine of the faith of Christ." pp. 8—12.

We here make our first pause; and request the reader's attention to the following observations :

It certainly is not correct to represent the conciliation of discordant sects as the great object" of the Bible Society. The great object (strictly speaking, it may be called the only object) of the Society, was and is the dispersion of Bibles and Testaments without note or comment. It is an object perfectly simple; and how far it has "failed of its effect" may be judged from this equally simple fact, that the number of Bibles and Testaments distributed by the Society, from the period of its institution up to September, 1816, amounted to one million, six hundred and eightysix thousand, five hundred and ninety-one.

An effect, however, of the institution, not perhaps definitely proposed at the outset, yet early and warmly anticipated, was that, by uniting Christians of various persuasions in a common pursuit of deep interest, it would soften down their mutual asperities of feeling, and promote the reciprocation of kindness and benevolence. A collateral object of the Society this may fairly be called: but, whatever it was, we are now given to understand that the design argued great ignorance of human nature, and that the event has not justified the expectations so fondly entertained. The controversy respect

The members of the Bible Society have been accustomed to regard the actual success of their undertaking as affording a strong presumption in its favour. Under every new attack, under every fresh prediction of evil, they have referred the objector to past experience for a reply. Of this anchor the Bishop of Carlisle would now deprive them; for such we presume to be the purport of the first paragraph of the foregoing extract. It is a paragraph, indeed, of which the general bearing is clearer than the exact construction. But the subject demands some notice, and may justify a moment's delay before we enter on the more direct arguments of the right reverend author. What may be the precise force of the expressions used in the paragraph referred to -what exactly is meant by the "object of an enterprise failing of its effect"-what that is, which has so strangely divided the kingdom-ing the expediency of the instituwhether it be the idea of "combining all mankind in love and good-will," or the question about "moulding and turning human nature out of its course, as to the determined prosecution of its several aims and objects;"-these, and such other points, it is not necessary to agitate. All that seems important is, to state what we consider as the general Scope of the passage in question ;and we read it thus: The great object proposed by the institution of the Bible Society was the promotion of mutual good-will and kindness among discordant sects of Christians; and that object has utterly failed.

tion has disturbed and divided the kingdom learned and unlearned have all taken their sides; and general union and universal harmony are quite out of the question.".

66

The members of the Bible Society would probably have no objection to allow that the opposition which the plan has encountered was not foreseen at the commencement. Judging from ourselves, we should certainly say that it was not; nor should we hesitate to add, that the spectacle of such an opposition to such a cause has operated on us as a painful disappointment, and that it has excited

feelings far different from the complacency with which we should contemplate a scene of "general union and universal harmony." Yet the use made of this circumstance on the present occasion does strike us as somewhat singular. The case stands as follows:-The expediency of the Bible Society was questioned nearly as soon as the Society began to exist; and the opposition to it, for a time at least, continued in unabated strength. The "novel union and combination" of Churchmen and Dissenters, was peculiarly reprobated. It was treated as a principle inexpressibly mischievous. It was denounced also as chimerical, and as pregnant with the seeds of disunion. This fact the Bishop of Carlisle justly states; and he has at the same time evidently and deliberately adopted the views of those by whom such a denunciation was made. Meanwhile, the Society developed its extraordinary growth in perfect peace. Its influence expanded with the power and the silence of light. The novel union produced no trouble, nor issued in any explosion. And still the assailants spoke ominous things; and still they spoke, only to be falsified by the event. No mischief took place, except the prediction of mischief; no discordant sound was heard, except the prophecy of discord. Then, precisely at this point, the adversaries turn short on the Society, and quote this very controversy of their own raising, as a realization of the evils which they had abortively foretold. They cite the baffled prophecy of contention as a triumphant proof that contention exists, and mistake their own violence for the quarrels which they foreboded!

This is really a new method of making prophecies fulfil themselves.

On this topic, it does not seem necessary to add any thing more, except the statement of our firm conviction that the evils attending the controversy on the Bible So

ciety-and we sorrowfully admit them to be real and considerable evils-have, however, been compensated, and with an immense over-balance, by the benefits which that institution has produced even already. But there is another subject on which we shall venture to detain the reader a moment, before we advance to the body of the right reverend author's objections. It will have been seen that, in adverting to the controversy in question, the Bishop uses the words, "the first point which seems strange to the friends of the Establishment"-thus directly appropriating this appellation to those members of the Church who have disapproved of the Bible Society. The expression, we are afraid, is used under too strong a profession of peculiar caution to be ascribed to inadvertence. Besides which, (as we have already intimated,) the Bishop treats the question, through a great part of the subsequent disquisition, as if it were entirely a question between the Church of England, especially the clergy, on the one hand, and the Bible Society on the other.

Would the Bishop of Carlisle, then, really exclude the members of the Bible Society in a body from the pale of the friends of the Es-tablishment? Would he really maintain that, in the mouth of a subscriber to that Society, professions of ecclesiastical allegiance must necessarily, or, at least, very probably, be false? Is this the judgment he would pass on those lamented characters, Mr. Spencer Perceval, Bishop Porteus, and Dean Vincent? The numerous and honourable mitres which the Society reckons among its chief ornaments, would he consider these as stained with treason? The distinguished members of the laity who have stood forward in defence of the Society; as, for example, Lords Liverpool, Harrowby, Castlereagh, Hardwicke; would he regard these as secretly treacherous, or in

different to that Establishment of which they are professed disciples, or constituted guardians? Insinua tions of such a nature, against such persons, are really somewhat confounding. An eminent statesman of antiquity, on being informed that one of the most illus trious of his countrymen had been put to death on a charge of treason, is reported to have exclaimed, "If Parmenio was innocent, who then is safe? If Parmenio was guilty, who then is to be trusted?" So we may say; If the exalted personages alluded to, and many others equally, or scarcely less, distinguished, are innocent of the disloyalty charged upon them, then where is the character, however elevated, which may not be vilified? If, on the contrary, they deserve the imputation, then what possible assurance can we have of the loyalty of any body else,-of the Bishop of Carlisle, for example, or the Bishop of Lincoln, or the new Bishop of Llandaff, or the learned and (we affix the epithet most sincerely) venerable Society at Bartlett's Buildings?

Let us now proceed to examine the substance of the right reverend author's reasoning; which is, in fact, no other than the familiar argument of the inexpedience and danger of distributing Bibles without note or comment. The lower orders of the community, it seems, cannot gain any understanding of the, true scriptural meaning of various parts of the holy Scriptures, unless they are provided with some guide or help for the purpose. So far from this, the distribution of the unexplained Bible, the Bishop elsewhere tells us, will be too.likely to "give encouragement to the wayward mind to wrest it to wrong ideas, perplexing doubts, and hurtful purposes."

The absolute necessity of Biblieal commentaries, and the dangers to be apprehended from the circulation of the unexpounded text, have, as has just been obCHRIST. OBSERV. No 181.

served, formed a familiar head of objection with the assailants of the Bible Society. Occasionally, indeed, the argument has been proposed in a shape so extravagant, as clearly to identify it with the old papal topic of the nasus cereus, the theme of the strongest reprobation of our reformers. With what feelings would the Ridleys and the Jewells have heard it maintained by a member of the English Church, that the true and unadulterated word of God, if given away by a Papist, will be productive of Popery; if by a Socinian, of Socinianism; if by a Calvinist, of Calvinism? Yet has this proposition been laid down in the broadest terms by a controvertist on the present subject. The work before us exhibits a greatly mitigated, and far more tolerable, form of the same argument. The Bishop of Carlisle is apprehensive that wayward minds may pervert the unexplained Bible to hurtful purposes. He cannot conceive how the lower classes should understand the holy Scriptures, or at least various parts of them, without assistance. But the argument does not appear to be supported by any new proofs or illustrations, excepting a passage from Lactantius, and an incident recorded in the Acts; both of which, so far as they apply at all, prove the contrary.

The passage from Lactantius, whatever be its force or meaning, does not refer to the scriptural books in general, but to the writings of the prophets, or, at the most, to the whole of the Old Testament;* which now constitutes

* The technical term, The Prophets, has a greater latitude in the writings of the fathers, than among modern Christians. Moses, David, and Solomon, are included in it by Lactantius himself; (Inst. lib. IV. cc. 5, 8.;) and the word appears occasionally put for the Old Testament in general. The term was used with a different sort of latitude by the later Jews. See Christ. Observ. Vol. IV. pp. 765, et seq. This last method F

but a part of the sacred canon. But what does the passage in fact mean? A very leading idea of the disquisition from which it is extracted, is this; That the ancient prophecies were a sealed book before the coming and passion of Christ, but that, as they referred to these very events, therefore, when the events actually took place, the predictions became lucid and intelligible. In exact con

formity with this idea, the extract in question states, that our Saviour, after his resurrection, explained the prophecies to his disciples, which prophecies could not be understood (" antequam pateretur") before he suffered. It is true, the passage further implies that, even then, those prophecies

of using it is supposed to have been sanctioned by our Divine Saviour himself in the last chapter of St. Luke (cited above.) See Poole's Synops. in loco.

It is necessary to bear in mind the enlarged sense put on the term by the fathers, in order to conceive the full force of that passage in the Te Deum; "The glorious company of the Apostles -the goodly fellowship of the Prophets -praise thee." Indeed, we conceive the term Apostles also to be there used with a similar extension; and this idea too seems justified by several passages in the fathers. The reader will then perceive with what beauty of gradation the chorus of praise is arranged in that unrivalled composition. The Hallelujah is represented as beginning with the highest order of created beings, and as descending, through various orders of the blessed, to earth; while the angelic host of cherubim and seraphim, the beatified ministers of the complete dispensation of Christ,-the beatified ministers of the prophetic dispensation of Moses, the beatified martyrs of Christ, who had sealed a good confession with their blood, and the holy church throughout all the world, successively bear a part in the harmony. The simple description is perhaps more really sublime than the splendid angelic hierarchy of the schools, with all their thrones dominations, princedoms, virtues, powers," even when distributed and quaternioned by the admirable genius of Milton.

*Vide Instit. lib. IV. cc. 15, 20.

would not have been understood, had not our Saviour himself condescended to expound them ;that is, they would not have been understood by the disciples :-but does this apply to us, whom these very disciples have furnished with the true solution of the prophetic mysteries, by largely relating the history of their Divine Master, and minutely illustrating it from the several predictions which it successively fulfilled? Do we, who are thus surrounded by the daylight of the New Testament, stand in the same position with the disciples under the circumstances supposed, rootedly prepossessed as they were with the notion of a temporal Messiah, stunned in all their hopes by the death of Christ, and scarcely able to trust their for the evidence of his

senses

resurrection?

We have thus joined issue very contentedly with the right reverend author, on the passage quoted from Lactantius; with what success the reader must judge ;-but, having done so, let us be allowed to express our surprise, that, in citing an incident in the history of our Saviour, and citing it as the groundwork of an important argument, it should have been thought proper to state the fact rather in the words of an uninspired father of the church, and that too so late a father as Lactantius, than in the language of the sacred Evangelist who records it. It is perfectly fair to give us the note and comment; but at least let us have the text also. Luke, who relates the incident in his last chapter, not only says much more fully what is said by Lactantius, (and, so far, the remarks we have already made on Lactantius will apply,) but he adds this capital circumstance. "Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the Scrip

St.

tures." Here was more than exposition; here was illumination

« PrécédentContinuer »