« PrécédentContinuer »
however, the more willingly cite the matic people, the devil has intro. passage for the sake of the conclud- duced infidelity under the mask of ing remarks, in order that he may do religious sanctimoniousness! We will us the justice to believe, that, though give but one passage more, leaving our words were strong, our hearts our readers to make their own comwere not unkind. Referring to one ments on it. Mr. M'Neile
says: of his then recent publications we am become an enemy to my people said:
because I tell you the truth: yet, Mr. M'Neile tells his country- Holy Father, let me pray for them men, that be, like Jeremiah of old, in secret with fervent affection; and has a special commission to them warn them in public with persever. from God, and that it is a national ing faithfulness, if yet Thy uplifted sin that they refuse to hear his words. hand may be stayed in longer forHe even puts forth a declamation of bearance. But it not...O my God, his own, mixed
up with the word of at the last, when the word shall pass God, heading it, in italics, with. Thus Thy lips in righteousness, sustain my saith the Lord God of England;' and trembling flesh, and give me strength concluding it with Hear, ye men above nature to rejoice in thy holy of Britain: be not proud, for the vengeance!' And we are to receive, Lord hath spoken.' So that all who upon pain of the charge of being 'indoubt the justice of Mr. M ́Neile’s fidels,” this strange declamation, beapplication and paraphrase of the cause the writer professes to be an inspired denunciations, are scoffers elucidator of unfulfilled prophecy ! and infidels. "The man who dares We write in sorrow, not in bitterto speak the word of the Lord among ness; for who that has witnessed you,' says Mr. M`Neile, adverting Mr. M`Neile's talents and eloquence, to himself, receives no fair play. or been edified by his zeal and piety,
No, you will not hear: but you shall but must lament that such endow-
his meaning being mistaken, by page 4, and the passage, " What couching it in a more guarded style. Christian can close the above disWe would also respectfully recome cussion, &c.” at page 77, seventymend to himself, and to other “ stu- three pages after, and with no redents of prophecy" in the present ference whatever to that sermon. In day, the following observations of quoting that passage in our January the learned Ernesti, in his “Narratio Number, we have prefaced it, as Mr. Critica de Interpretatione Prophe- MoNeile justly states, with the retiarum Messianarum in Ecclesia ported quotation from his sermon : Christiana.” Though the particular they are thus brought into juxta-pocontroversy to which they allude is sition; and he thinks we meant to not precisely the same as some which imply that he preferred miraculous have been lately much discussed, gifts to Christian graces. But if he they inculcate a lesson at all times will believe us on our sincere decla. equally important, and equally liable ration, we assure him that we meant to be overlooked. “ Omnino oportet nothing of the kind, we believed noin hoc genere NON ACERBUM ESSE. thing of the kind, and we wished to Vides tu, O bone, Christum in V. T. insinuate nothing of the kind. He ubi alius aut omnino non, aut non has quoted sufficient from his sermon ita clare videt, ut tu vel vides, vel to shew that we could not believe videre te putas.
Vide eum tibi, et it; and we trust he will do us the gratias age Deo. Sed fac, ut eum justice to be convinced that we did in cor, cum ejus mansuetudine et not mean to assert what we could lenitate, recipias, ne frustra videris. not believe. If he will refer to the Ille vero alter eum alibi pariter videt, passage, he will see that it was our si non ubique in V. T. satis clare, ut wish “ to take leave of the discusdubitet, hæreat, per umbram modo, sion” with a few practical remarks, at in N, T. videt in clara luce reful- in which we believed all Christians gentem, et pro ejus claritatis bene. would agree; and the tenor of the Kcio gratias agit Deo. (Opuscula paragraph was intended to be to the Theologica, edit. ii. p. 477.) We effect, that whatever controversythere do not go to the extent of Ernesti’s may be as to the question of mira. “ Vide eum tibi:" far from it; for if culous gifts, there can be none as to the recent discoveries respecting the the question of graces; and that if prophecies, the person of our Lord, we could not concur with our friends miracles, or other points, be indeed, in the former, they would doubtless Scripture truth, they ought not to agree with us in the latter. It never be withheld from the community of occurred to us that our words could the faithful; rather ought they to be be so construed as to imply just the promulgated with a zeal correspond- contrary to what we meant; and ing to their importance: but the our correspondent would see that spirit of the passage deserves serious they could not be intended to bear consideration ; and particularly the the meaning he assigns to them, if exhortation to receive Christ in the he would read only the next two or meekness of Christ, and the excel- three lines to those which he has lent advice " in hoc genere non acer. quoted; for thus runs the passage: bum esse."
“Wereit not, then, wise to turn from 4. Our correspondent's next para- such questionable gifts, to the solid graph gives us real pain, because it practical realities of vital, saving, appears that we have given him pain, sanctifying truth? Oh, who would and where we had not the slightest covet even a faith that could remove intention of doing so. He will see, by mountains, rather than charity, withreference to the Christian Observer out which it profiteth nothing. Let, pamphlet of the “ Documents and then, those who have attained to the Correspondence,” that the quotation more excellent way, as we are perfrom his reported sermon was at suaded have those friends on whose
opinion in the present matter we have had not sanctioned. Now in all ho. freely commented, be content with the nesty we can say that we have acted higher manifestation, and not go in this matter with truth and deliback to doubtful speculations, or the cacy, and as we would be done by. assertion of miraculous gifts, which, It was important to the argument even if vouchsafed, would have no respecting Miss Fancourt's cure to necessary connexion with spiritual allude to the fact of so remarkable edification or eternal salvation.” a sermon having been preached at Could we express more strongly our the chapel which she ordinarily atbelief that our friends had attained tends, the very Sunday before her to “ the more excellent way,” “ the recovery. It was publicly known higher manifestation ?
Could we that Mr. M`Neile had preached such mean to represent them as trusting a sermon, and the asserters of the in miracles, or making more of gifts miracle expressly urged the cure as than of graces? We only regret an illustration of the doctrine conthat our words should have been tained in it. As Mr. M°Neile had capable of such a possible construc- thus publicly advocated the doctrine, tion, as nothing was in reality further there seemed no reason why we from our mind.
should not allude to his name; So far, indeed, from wishing to mis- but, with perhaps over-delicacy, we represent Mr. M`Neile's sentiments avoided doing so either in our Noon this point, we should have been vember or December Number; nor truly rejoiced, had we happened to was it till after his sermon had been have thought of it, to have availed placarded in Patagonian characters ourselves of his remarks, in order to about the streets of London, and shew, that, by the declarations of our exposed in hundreds of shop-windows friends themselves, miraculous gifts for weeks or months, and when also are as nothing compared with cha- it was every where spoken of in rity; though, after all, it would have connexion with miracles and Miss been quite superfluous to quote any Fancourt's cure, that we broke human testimony to this point, as St. through our silence. We were not Paul has so clearly determined the aware that its publication was unmatter. Our correspondent will, we authorized; and from its being at are sure, perceive, that, however full length, and occupying twentywicked he may think was our de. four close columns, an hour's delisign, we could not, even for our berate reading, we sincerely imaown sake, have urged a charge so gined, that, thinking the subject preposterously absurd as that our very important, he had furnished the Christian brethren, men whom we manuscript, or at least allowed it to described as having attained the be printed. We had no acquaintmore excellent way, the higher ma ance with the work in which it apnifestation, were asserting that to peared (The Preacher), nor knew speak with the tongues of men or
that it lived by the execrable pracangels was better than charity. We tice of stealing and publishing sertook it for granted that they were at mons against the wishes of the parties; least with us here, and it never oc one of the most base practices of the curred to us to be necessary to look present degenerate, money-loving into their sermons for proof of so age, and a species of injury to which obvious a fact. We can only repeat Mr. M`Neile's great popularity has our regret that our words could for made him a frequent victim, and one moment appear to our corre which is painful to every upright and spondent to contain such an allega- honourable mind to contemplate. tion as that on which he animadverts. Still, as the sermon was a matter
5. And now one word on the last of notoriety, and the author acknowcharge, that we have alluded to a ledges that the report of it was publication of his sermon which he " substantially correct,” we see not
why he should be displeased at its speech. Being afterwards persuaded being referred to as containing his that its being cut close to the root sentiments. The opinion advocated would enable him to speak so as to in it he believes to be Scriptural; be understood, he submitted to the and if so, he has no reason to be operation; and the effect has been, ashamed of this discourse, which that his voice, although indistinct defends it temperately, eloquently, and thick, is yet intelligible to perand with serious adduction of the sons accustomed to converse with Divine Word.
him. This I experienced from daily It was, we well remember, in that intercourse. He often spoke to me sermon that Mr. M'Neile brought of his sufferings, and of the humaforward the alleged miraculous case nity of the present king, who had of the five hundred persons who restored him to his situation as spoke and gave honour to Christ head of his tribe and governor of after their tongues had been cut out Khist. I am not an anatomist, and by the Arians. The story has since cannot therefore give a reason why been taken up by H. S. C. H. and a man, who could not articulate with Mr. Boys, and much weight seems half a tongue, should speak when he to be attached to it, especially as had none at all ; but the facts are as Milner, in his History of the Church, tated, and I had them from the very inclines to the idea of its being mi- best authority, old Zal Khan himraculous. For ourselves, we are far self."-(Sketches of Persia, by a from being clear as to the truth of Traveller in the East, vol. ii. pp. the facts; but even were they ad- 115, 116.) mitted, there are cases quite as re Such is Sir J. Malcolm's statemarkable upon record, where no ment, published long before the miracle is pretended. We copy present question was afloat. Yet, the following illustration from the with such stories on record, Mr. Boys “ Sketches of Persia,” known to be gravely accuses the Christian Obwritten by Sir John Malcolm, though server of Neological tendencies for without his name, and giving an ac not believing the alleged miracle count of that distinguished officer's of the five hundred persons in the first embassy to Persia.
He says, that we
have “ explained away a miracle “ Zál Khan of Khist. of the early church which Milner “ This remarkable man has esta- records believing), exactly [Mr. blished a great name in his native Boys's own italics) in the
that mountains, betwixt Abusheher and Neologians explain away the miracles Shiraz; and he was long distinguished of the Bible." Now we give him as one of the bravest and most at his choice of difficulties. Does he tached followers of the Zend family. believe the above story of Zâl Khan? When the death of Lootf Ali Khan He cannot say that the evidence terminated its power, he, along with for its truth is not, at the least, as the other governor of provinces and strong—we must say, far strongerdistricts in Fars, submitted to Aga than that for the above legend of the Mahomed Khan. That cautious and sixth century. Does he, then, accruel monarch, dreading the ability knowledge it a miracle? If he does, and doubtful of the allegiance of this then the Divine miraculous power is chief, ordered his eyes to be put out. as much displayed for the Persian An appeal for the recal of the sen Mohammedan, as for the five huntence being treated with disdain, dred Christian confessors. Or does Zâl Khan loaded the tyrant with he doubt that it was a miracle, and
• Cut out his tongue,' was admit, that, if the fact be truly stated, the second order. This mandate was it may be accounted for by phyimperfectly executed, and the loss sical 'causes? Then be falls into of half this member deprived him of the very heresies of the Christian
Observer: he virtually opposes the ring in their cycle of variation at the reasoning of Milner ; and, 10 use his present moment. There were some own words, “explains away the mi- of the same extravagant interpretaracle exactly after the manner of tions of prophecy, the alleged perthe Neologians.” The story of Zâl sonal reign of Christ upon earth, the Khan is another proof, if another alleged revival or non-cessation of were needed, of the truth of our thegift of tongues and working of mifirst and last position, that the only racles and healing the sick in the name safe line, the only way to prevent of Jesus ; yet, connected with all this, the recoil of infidelity against the there was such horrible licentiousSacred Narrative itself, is to vouch ness as may not be named among for no miracle since the age of the Christians. We will quote, though not Apostles. Miracles there may have the whole narrative, yet a few passages, been; but they are not articles of in which not a little that Dr. Dwight belief; nor, with deference to Mr. describes of the extravagancies at Boys, are we Neologians, should we New Lebanon in America might not credit them, any more than we serve for a picture of certain recent are Neologians, because we donot scenes at Port-Glasgow in Scotland. believe in Joanna Southcote. Had We confine ourselves to the head Milner lived to read the case of Zal of fanaticism; in justice excluding Khan, we believe, that, with his judi- other matters, which do not apply to cious mind, he would not have ad. the modern instance; and we state hered to his opinion of the miracle this explicitly, that we may not of the sixth century; and we wish seem, even by inadvertence, to inwe could say that we indulged sinuate a false accusation. On the equal hopes of the present avouch- contrary, we have not a shadow of ers. Mr. Boys may please to ridi. reason to suppose otherwise than cule science, and call it idiotic ; but that the Port-Glasgow claimants to we are quite sure, that had there the gift of tongues and working of been a little more of true science, miracles are persons of honest and or even of extended reading, and exemplary life, but whose imaginaknowledge of the actual facts bear- tions have been heated by the new ing upon the cases in question, we theories, which have turned aside should not have heard of so many
some stronger minds. We
also, that, were their life ever so bad, But these things are not new;
which we have no reason whatever they have been in every age: they to imagine, the abstract question have their cycles; their periodical would not thereby be affected; for, risings, fallings, and decays. While as Mr. M'Neile most scripturally we write, our eye glances on the observes, miraculous gifts have never four volumes of Dr. Dwight's Travels, had any necessary connexion with where, as we remember, occursa mo- piety or moral conduct. But still nitory exemplification, in the history the history of the Shakers, and other of the American “ Shakers,” of the extravagant sects, is monitory, beworse than extravagancies which cause it shews, that, when once men accompanied the pretence to those give the rein to flights of fancy in revery prodigies which are now put ligion, it is impossible to say, espe. forth in Scotland. The history is cially among uneducated and ennot only too long for our pages, butthusiastic minds, where the mischief is a record of grossly vicious ex may end; and, in point of histori. cesses and impurities with which we cal fact, the pretence of working mishould not dare to stain them, But racles, both in the Protestant and the it is a fearful illustration of the re- Papal church, has invariably, sooner sults of fanaticism-and a fanati or later, been accompanied by excism, be it observed, interwoven with cesses which were little contem. those very notions which are recur plated by those who originated the