tirely at home when called upon to express their sentiments at length on any subject which they have previous ly investigated; what happy-what mighty results would soon follow. The face of things would be entirely changed; and young men would enter upon their professions under very different auspices and with very different prospects from those they now enjoy. MELANCTHON. FOR THE CHRISTIAN SPECTATOR. On viewing an Eclipse of the Moon. - On yon pale planet, through the blue expanse Trimming her faint lamp with a trembling hand, -May we not think, They bear us in their hands?—What though their harps We may not hear through this our fleshly veil; Might they not waft us, from some fleecy cloud, Looks uncontaminate on the ways of men? Where thou wert queen alone. Thus pass away Our boasted joys, our sublunary hopes,— H. Keview of New (Concluded from p. 94.) HAVING disposed of the question respecting Episcopal patronage, we come now to what is of more importance-a question of principle. Whatever may have been the commendation bestowed on Bible Societies, by any or all the clergy in Christendom, if it can be proved that they are unsound in principle, and that they are attempting the conversion of men by a method different from that which the Scriptures themselves point out, they ought to be abandoned. With this, Bishop Hobart bas expressly charged them. They are erroneous in principle, he tells us, because they separate the Church of God from the Word of God. The idea is not altogether original with the Bishop. Mr. Norris had glanced at it, in his "Practical Exhibition;" but the Bishop seems have matured it with great care, and he insists on it with a frequency which shows that he attaches great importance to it. In his "Address before the Auxiliary New-York Bible and Common Prayer Book Society," he declares, “In translating then, and publishing the Liturgy in conjunction with the Bible, and distributing them throughout the world, we follow the scriptural plan for evangelizing it. We present to them God's Word and God's Church." Again; Publicationg. He supposes a heathen to have read the Bible, and there to have found that God has instituted a visible Church; and then, supposing the heathen to enquire "Where am I to find this Church?" the Bishop adds, "Does he address the question to one of us, my brethren? We answer him, Here is an exhibition of this Church, in her doctrine, her ministry, and worship. This Book of Common Prayer holds these forth to you, as they have been transmitted from the early ages of the Church, as her worship has been ordered and improved by the wisdom and piety of successive ages." And in the peroration, after mentioning "the combined distribution of the Bible and Book of Common Prayer," with great emphasis, he urges, "Let no solicitations, and no assaults, direct or indirect, induce you to deviate from this principle. It is the principle by which, extending in union the Word and Church of God, you will follow the plan which he has instituted for converting the world." And subsequently, in his Address to the Convention, when speaking of Bible Societies, he says, "These Societies seem to me, erroneous in the principle on which, in order to secure general co-operation, they are founded-the separation of the Church from the Word of God-of the sacred volume from the ministry, the worship, and the ordinances which it enjoins as of Divine institution, and the instruments of the prop agation and preservation of gospel truth." The doctrine of the Bishop then is, that the "scriptural plan" for evangelizing the world, is the publishing and distributing "the Liturgy in conjunction with the Bible;" and that Bible Societies which circulate the Scriptures only, are founded in error. If these sentiments be correct, Bible Societies must of course be given up, and the sooner the better. But let us see whetber the charge thus brought against them, can be substantiated. The soundness of an argument is tested by the consequences which flow from it. Let us apply this test to the Bishop's argument. If then it is true, that to circulate the Scriptures without the Book of Common Prayer, is to separate the Church of God from the Word of God, it must follow, 1. That there is no Church of God where there is no Book of Common Prayer-no portion of Christendom can be counted a portion of Christ's Church, but that small part of it which uses the liturgy and offices of the Episcopal Church. There may be some to whom such intolerance may not be very alarming; but how will they get over the following consequences? If to circulate the Scriptures without the Book of Common Prayer, is to separate the Church of God from the Word of God, it must follow, 2d. That the Prayer Book is of more importance to the Church than the Scriptures themselves. Send the Bible where you will, no church can arise, it seems, under its enlightening and quickening power-but send the Prayer Book, and at once you have the Church before you, "in her doctrines and her worship." Again, it follows, 3d. That the Church, as exhibited in the Book of Common Prayer, must be something different from the Church as exhibited in the Bible. Otherwise the reader could find her, not only in one, but in both these volumes. But it seems a man may possess, and may study the Bible, and yet have no true knowledge of the Church, in her doctrines, her ministry, and her worship. These he can learn only from the Common Prayer Book. Such a consequence, it becomes a man well to consider, who attaches great importance to the divine right of episcopacy. For ourselves-and we believe we speak the sentiments of most Episcopalians also, we are satisfied with the Church as the Bible reveals her to us; and we choose to own nothing as essentially and truly belonging to her doctrines, her ministry, or her worship, which we do not find warranted and taught in the inspired volume. We are persuaded that Bishop Hobart would be far from embracing these conclusions. Let him, then, abandon the position whence they inevitably flow. We have stated them only with a view of showing how untenable that position is; and with what inconsistencies he is chargeable while he maintains it,-inconsistencies which cannot be urged against his brethren who unite with other christians in the "circulation of the scriptures without note or comment." "So soon," says Dr. Clarke of Cambridge, a very sincere Episcopalian, "so soon as it shall be proved that the distribution of the Bible alone is hostile to the Established Church, then, and then only, be that Church subverted." So it becomes every christian to speak, who would place the will of our Divine Master above the interests of a single denomination; though he may think he has a warrant in the Bible for what distinguishes that denomination from all others. A Church that honors the Scriptures as they ought to be honored, will receive them, both as the only rule and a perfect rule of practice. Such, their author designed them to be. "To the law," he has said, "and to the testimony; if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them." "Search the Scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me." "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness; that the man of God may be perfect,-thoroughly furnished unto all good works." To question, or in any way deny the sufficiency of the Scriptures for all these purposes, has ever been found an error, leading far astray. It was to this very disposition to look for the worship and ministry of the Church in some other volume than the Bible, that she owed the degradation which overtook her in the middle ages; and when the reformers arose to free her from the burdens and darkness of papal superstition, their great principle was that which has been so happily expressed by a distinguished prelate of the Church of England. "The Bible, and the Bible alone, is the religion of protestants." To this divine standard, then, we are to bring every thing which professes to belong to the doctrine, the ministry, and the worship of the Church, and to be essential to her welfare, if we would not abandon the cardinal point of Protestantism; and we are utterly at a loss to conceive why any protestant, who believes his views of the Church and her ordinances to be derived from the word of God, should insist on putting into our hands another book, as essential to a true acquaintance with the Church. "As Churchmen," says the Christian Observer, feel anxious for the very widest distribution of the Bible, not only be Icause we think we read in it the Church of England ourselves, but because we think every unbiassed reader of it, of whatever sect or persuasion be be, ought, in the main, to do so too. We believe not that the violences of sects, derived from the Bible, need the correction of a Prayer Book; but that the errors of sects, derived from their own heated imaginations, find their best corrective in the Bible itself. We believe that the study of the Bible itself, particularly as conducted by the humble we and unsophisticated mind of a poor man, essentially purifies him from the errors which disqualify, and imbues him with the feelings and principles which qualify him for a true and genuine son of the Church of We believe the Bible England. alone to be no fit instrument in the hands of enthusiasts, schismatics, or heresiarchs; and that it is found universally necessary to sustain their views of scriptural doctrine by a large addition of appropriate tracts miscoloured statements of and truth." But when This is the language of consistent and conscientious Episcopalians, which we can understand. others come forward, and insist that to circulate the Scriptures without the Prayer Book is to separate the Church from the word of God; that it is only by a combined distribution of the Prayer Book with the Bible that we can learn what forms the doctrines, ministry and worship of the Church; they may compel an uncharitable man to suspect that they are troubled with some secret misgivings,lest the unbiassed enquirer should be unable to find their church in the Bible, unless he had the Prayer Book to shew him how to find it. Nor are these fears of evil from a circulation of the Scriptures without note or comment, more inconsistent with the character of a church who calls herself protestant, than with the character she claims when she styles herself "eminently apostolical and primitive." There is nothing which more distinguishes those early Fathers who lived in "apostolical and primitive" times, than their desire to see the Scriptures spread and studied, and their full confidence in the Bible as all-sufficient, with the aid of the Holy Spirit, to build up the christian in his most holy faith. Among the Fathers of the second century, Justin Martyr declares, “it is true that those who read the prophets are condemned to death, to deter persons from perusing them, for fear they should come to the knowledge of the truth. But the scheme has not succeeded; for not only we read these books ourselves, but we offer them, as you see, for you to read them also."(a) Clement teaches that "the scriptures render men holy and heavenly. Think of this, you who are near and you who are afar off: for the word of God is restricted to no class of persons; this light is common to all."(b) Among the writers of the third century; Origen tells us "we wish that you would use serious efforts, not only to understand the word of God at church, but also to read it at home, and that you would occupy yourself in the law of the Lord; for Jesus Christ is there also, and he is every where nigh unto those that seek him."(c) Jerome records a fact, which shews that christians in that day were employed in the very work which occupies the members of Bible Societies among ourselves. "When Pamphilus saw any indigent persons, he gave them largely according to his ability; and he not only lent them Bibles to read, but eagerly made presents of them both to men and women." The testimony of Gregory Nazianzen, in the fourth century, of Jerome and others, is to the same effect. Such are the views of apostolical and primitive saints, as to the sufficiency of the scriptures for the growth and spread of pure christianity. But where, in all their writings, shall we find such advice as this;-"never lose sight of this cardinal principle -the combined distribution of the Bible and Book of Common Prayer. Let no solicitations, and no assaults, direct or indirect, induce you to deviate from this principle. It is the principle by which,extending in union the word and the church of God, you will follow the plan which he has instituted for converting the world.”(d) When the excellent Pamphilus, whom historians have called "the great (a) Epist. ad Diog. (e) Orig. in Lev. c. 16. Hom. 9. (d) Address before the Auxiliary Bible and Common Prayer Book Society, p. 28. glory of the church of Cæsarea," was going about circulating the Holy Scriptures; had he been told that he must give a Prayer Book with the Bible, or he would be found to have separated the church from the word of God, we imagine his reply would have been a rebuke which would have shown that he thought the suggestion presumptuous and unseasonable. But the irrelevancy and inad equacy of this and other objections, must still further appear from a statement of some of the additional claims of Bible Societies on the confidence and patronage of the christian public. This question has been mixed up with others quite foreign to it, and has suffered by the alliance. It is necessary to disengage it, that we may view it, in its own native merits. The question then is not, whether the church is benefited by the labours of those learned and pious men, who have written commentaries on the scriptures; or furnished summaries of christian doctrine and worship, in the form of creeds and articles or confessions of faith. Neither Mr. Jay, nor any other intelligent advocate of Bible Societies, thinks of saying that "the Jeromes and the Chrysostoms of ancient times; and the Vitringas, and the Patricks, and the Lowths, and the Hammonds, and the Whitbys, and the Hornes, and the Horsleys, of modern days, might have been spared the necessity of their massy volumes, explaining and illustrating the sacred text."(e) We neither advance any such sentiment, nor do our sentiments lead to any such conclusion, when we speak of the importance and sufficiency of the Holy Scriptures without note or comment. We speak of their sufficiency for the great end of saving the souls of men, though unaccompanied by a Prayer Book, or any other uninspired bo ok however important in its place. We (e) Corrector's reply, p. 16. |
