ted. How can it consistently lower its high and holy claims? How can it at all yield to erroneous schemes? It certainly cannot but denounce them; and the fact that it gives the prophetic warning concerning them, shews in what light Christians should view every religion which has sprung up since the era of Christianity, or which shall spring up hereafter. 3. In the disclosure of future and invisible realities, a decided preference must be given to the Scriptures over every other religion. Where the realities to be described are not known, the inventor must follow altogether, the dictates of his judgment. He must form to himself the most plausible theory he is able, concerning the eternal world, and represent it accordingly. But aside from the Scriptures, how absurd is every thing which has been communicated concerning the state after death! Where the Bible has not guided the spiritual adventurer, into what extravagancies has he not fallen! God seems to have given up the contrivers of false religions to a sort of fatuity. In one respect, they have all egregiously erred, and proved most satisfactorily, that they never enjoyed any intercourse with Him, who knows the mind of man. I refer to the particularity and minuteness of their details concerning the eternal world. General and indeterminate representations of that world, we readily admit. But we are so constituted that we know not how to embrace numerous particulars, especially, if contrary to their nature they are invested with material attributes, in regard to objects originally so remote from our apprehensions. If the attempt is made, inevitable disgust and unbelief arise in the minds of sober enquirers. In Swedenborgianism, enlightened reason revolts at the absurdities which are produced by the particularity of its accounts of invisible things. The Arabian impostor long before in his famous Koran fell into the same mistake, and he details, in all their disgusting minuteness, the most childish fictions which the human imagination perhaps ever contrived. The classical student, in perusing the writings of antiquity, will be convinced that however the vulgar believed, the more sensible of the people must have rejected the endless tales of mythology, together with the minute and fanciful descriptions of the abodes of departed spirits, which are found in the poets. The religion of modern paganism wherever it has existed, possesses the same revolting character, in its details of the invisible world. Whether we refer to the popular traditions of the North or West, to the vedas of Hindoostan, or the Zendavesta of Persia, we shall find this same feature throughout-the lines of which in each one are deepened in proportion to the depravity of the system of which it is a part. But the Bible pursues an altogether different course. In this portion of its contents we see that amazing knowledge of the human mind, which indeed it every where exhibits. Unlike the Koran for instance, it never attempts to explain what is inexplicable, to clothe spiritual objects with the attributes of matter, or to "sensualize," as it has been well expressed, "the purity of the divine essence." Its representations of invisible realities are given rather in allusions, than in direct similitudes-in slight touches, than in deep and lengthened strokes. The joys of heaven, and the pains of hell are described in a chastened and general manner-are reduced, so to speak, to shadowy and indeterminate forms, which seize the attention and satisfy the reason by their unlikeness to any thing on earth. Indeed concerning the former, its most impressive account is, "Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things that God hath prepared for them that love him." Its representations throughout, teach us that the secrets of the eternal world can be but faintly conceived, by any means 340 The Religion of the Bible Compared with other Religions. which we possess of embodying them into form, and consistency. 4. The difference of external attestations, between the religion of the Bible and all others, is decidedly and alone in favour of the former. The principal attestation of this nature, which has ever been attempted in the history of religion, is miracles. These, in the opinion of mankind, have been thought necessary in order to authenticate the claim to inspiration. Indeed sound reason requires them. Purity of doctrine is not alone a sufficient attestation of the divine authority of any system. We cannot tell how pure, or excellent those doctrines must be which come from heaven, since we can conceive of different degrees of purity or excellence. The quality of the truths communicated is not in itself, therefore, the measure or index of their inspiration. We cannot set down this evidence of revealed religion so low as some bave done. But it is not entirely to be depended on aside from external attestations. When one coines professedly with a message from heaven, we need to know his testimonials. This is a natural enquiry. His own conviction may be sufficient for himself, but not for others and if he have such a message, God, who does nothing in vain, will enable him to substantiate it. The author of Swedenborgianism has therefore acted against the common sense of mankind, in pretending that the nature of his religion is its own proof. Doubtless he said this, be cause he could only assert that he was divinely commissioned, and not Mahomet was in a simprove it. ilar predicament. The nature of the proof he intended to give of his own mission was, however, of the most forcible kind. It is conveyed in the following reply to him of his kinsman Ali, when the impostor solicited assistance in his enterprise. "O prophet" whoever rises against thee, I will dash out his teeth, tear out his eyes, break his legs, rip up his belly." The miracle of the sword, [JULY (and there have been many such speciosa miracula,) was the only attestation which Mahomet deigned to give of a heavenly mission. The systems of Paganism, as also the Papal superstition, have occasionally indeed referred to supernatural effects, pretended to be wrought in confirmation of a divine authority, But we may safely reject pretensions of this nature in aid of systems already, or long established, because such pretensions are easily made where only friends, or those who are interested in the imposture, must be its witnesses. There is a vast difference between holding up a religion by these secret, ambiguous, and suspicious performances, and establishing it at first by a series of public beneficent miracles, performed in the face of unbelievers and enemies, as well as of friends. In the latter way, the religious system of the Bible was established under Moses and afterwards under Christ, and it is unique in the history of the world. The propagators of this religion, willing to answer the general expectations of mankind, came manfully forward, and proved that they were inspired by heaven in performing works which heaven only could enable them to perform. A circumstance material here also, is, that these works were recorded not long after, and even in some instances, during the life time of those, before whose eyes they were exhibited. In this respect, the accounts of miracles written several centuries after they took place, as for instance, those of Pythagoras, and Apollonius of Tyana, are by no means to be put in competition with the miracles recorded in the Bible. 5. We may estimate the value of scriptural religion compared with others, in its holiness or practical moral effects. moral effects. The holy tendency of this religion is a circumstance which distinguishes it from all false religions. These are, in general, systems of impurity, fraud and brutality. Their legitimate effect is to pollute and degrade the mind, enlisting its associations in favour of sin, and confining the exertion of its faculties to low or secular objects. Doubtless some of them, especially those that have been formed under the light of the bible, have here and there, a shining spot of heavenly truth, and of a pure morality. But the preponderance of the darkness is so great that it makes almost all the impression, and the light almost none. The most unexceptionable of these systems teach much that is puerile in matter, erroneous in sentiment, and unholy in practice. They neither define the nature of holiness, nor exhibit any instances of it in actual life. They agree, therefore, but too well with the ignorance, prejudices, and lust of the human heart. Indeed, mankind in their natural state, prefer any religion to a holy religion. They love a licentious religion, or even one of numerous and inconvenient forms and ceremonies, (to such, a French philosopher says they are the most strongly attached,) provided that under these, they may escape the obligation of giving their hearts to God. It is not wonderful therefore, that false schemes have had their adherence, and false gods, their worshippers, in every age. But infinitely different in this respect is the true religion. That, as is hardly needed to be here proved, is consummately pure and amiable. It is altogether worthy of the moral perfections of Him from whom it emanated. Taken in connexion with the great external seal which God has affixed to it, it wants nothing besides, to recommend it to perishing sinners. Accordingly all that cordial ly receive it are transformed into new creatures. The temper of their hearts is essentially changed, their love of sin is subdued, and their minds throughout take a heavenly bias. I have no room to detail the consistent practical effects of the true religion. Nothing is equal to it, or even like it on earth. Suffice it to say, that upon its more complete promulgation in the days of Christ and his apostles, and under the influence of the Holy Spirit, the human character shone out as the sun, from the midst of thick darkness. The world, wherever the gospel was received, put on a new and different aspect. Believers were inspired with glorious hopes, joys and resolutions. Their minds which had been filled with lust, violence and darkness, became the abode of virtue, gentleness and knowledge. The voice of God exacting holiness, yet exercising mercy, awoke man from his sinful and deadly sleep. broke the charm which had entranced him for four thousand years, and set him free to tread the ever-ascending path of " life and immortality." Such at first were the practical results of the holy doctrines of the cross. They have been similar on the hearts and lives of mankind ever since, in proportion to the vigour and purity with which those doctrines have been exhibited. Compared with other schemes of religious belief in this respect also, the religion of the scriptures is alone from heaven. It There are several other points perhaps of equal importance with those that have been considered, which present a contrast between this religion and the various superstitions embraced by mankind. But these are sufficient, and more than sufficient to authorize the inference which the writer has already deduced, and to give the reader some idea of this fruitful and profitable source of inquiry. A comparison of the kind which has now been attempted, especially if pursued more into detail, than bas here been thought advisable, might do much to deter some persons from becoming victims to the arts of religious imposture. Let all remember that the only book in which God has spoken to mankind is the Bible; and that whatever he has designed to communicate and enjoin therein, they are bound, by a regard of his authority, and of their salvation, to believe and practice. B. N For the Christian Spectator. Thascius Cyprianus was a native of Africa, and a celebrated teacher of rhetoric in Carthage. Convinced by Caecilius, a presbyter, about the middle of the third century, he adopted his name at his baptism; was, in the compass of a year, ordained a presbyter; and, in the next, made a bishop by the suffrage of the people, but against the opinion of five of the eight presbyters of the Church. (a) He soon deserted his charge, retiring from persecution. Censured by his people, and the christians at Rome, he alleged among other defences, a divine admonition revealed by vision. His sudden change from Gentilism, and almost simultaneous promotions; his conscious possession of superior talents, with consequent impatience of instruction and ignorance of evangelical doctrines, rendered him the victim of numerous and destructive errors. His native ambition, stimulated by opposition, and supported by mistaken conceptions of priestly of priestly power, led him to employ the protracted period of his retirement, in epistolary correspondence not only with his own forsaken charge, but with the bishops and presbyters of all the churches in the civilized world, wherever there existed inquietude. With him heresy and schism appeared convertible terms, and discipline, rather than truth, the proper instrument of their destruction. The bishops and church at Rome were successively dependent on his guidance, or jealous of his influence. The numerous bishops of Africa found him a bond of union, nor were the churches in Spain and Cappadocia, opposite extremes, insensible of his ascendency. His ideas of episcopal unity, and of the necessity of intercourse and mutual support among bishops, then every where parochial, probably laid the foundation (a) Vide Epist. 43. p. 227. of hierarchy in the church of Christ. The multiplication of presbyters became necessary in the cities, as the number of christians increased, more churches than one being in them now prohibited. The danger in times of persecution of convening in multitudes, the instruction of catechumeni apart from the church, the frequency of schisms, and other circumstances, evince, that different presbyters conducted worship, at least occasionally, in separate pla ces. But neither has diocesan episcopacy, nor a solitary instance of a ruling, or lay elder as yet occurred. Had there existed more than one congregation in Carthage, or Rome, they must have appeared in Cyprian's letters; for it is not probable that any other schisms, or heresies arose in either of those cities, within the period of his letters, than those which he has mentioned. The minuteness of his descriptions of persons and things, renders it certain, that had he been placed over more than one church, it would have appeared. On the contrary, no separate churches, no diversity of communions, no seduction of any particular section of his charge, are seen; but though convening in small numbers, and possibly in different places, they are considered one church, having the same officers. The bishop and presbyters at Carthage sat on the same bench, were all, in the language of the day, priests, to instruct and administer ordinances, acted in concert in all judgments, excommunications, and restorations; and, except when Cyprian assumed the power, but for which he always offered an excuse, they joined in ordinations. In the absence of the bishop, we find the presbyters refusing the communion to Gaius a co-presbyter, and to a deacon, in which Cyprian acknowledges, they acted uprightly and by rule. (b) Though evidently not scrupulous in the assumption of pow (b) p. 217, Ep. 34.-integre et cum disciplina fecistis. er, he trespassed only where he was sure of support, and never ventured to ordain a presbyter, but in the presbytery. When omitting bishops, readers, subdeacons, and acolythes, he names only præpositi and diaconi, it is evidence that the two original orders were not forgotten. "Since it becomes all to be observant of good order, much rather is it proper that the presbyters and deacons, præpositos et diaconos, should take care of this, who may afford an example and proof to others, by their conversation and manners." (c) At first opposed by the majority of his copresbyters, and not yet secure of new ones in whom he could confide, his language was very different from his after conduct. He declared that he had resolved from the commencement of his episcopate, to do nothprivately by his own opinion, with out the counsel of his presbytery, and without the consent of the people." (d). This representation extorted by circumstances, was in unison with those established customs, in the changing of which he was too successful. Hitherto each original church was governed by its presbytery, the president, gwerrws, of which is called in Cyprian, sometimes præpositus, but chiefly episcopus. Such presbytery, with its president, had been heretofore competent to the management of the ecclesiastic government and worship of the christians in each city, because of the paucity of their number. Cyprian, by the erroneous principle, that where a church has been planted no other ought to be erected, professedly an antidote to schism, at the same time enhanced episcopal influence, and laid the foundation of what he did not fore (c) Ep. 4. p. 174. (d) Quando à primordio episcopatus mei statuerim, nihil sine consilio vestro, et sine consensu plebis, meâ privatim sententia gerere de iis quæ vel gesta sunt vel gerenda, sicut honor mutuus poscit in commune tractabimus. p. 192. see, diocesan government. Though tumid with self-importance, and enamoured of ecclesiastical influence, it is possible that his opposition to the erection of a second altar, church and bishop, in any place, was at least primarily to suppress heresy. He wrote to Cornelius at Rome, who had informed him of the ordination of Novatian there, that it was irregular, because where there is one bishop there cannot be another, and pronounces him a spurious and rival head, out of the church. (e) He argues that Cornelius succeeded Fabianus, and that Novatian had no predecessor at Rome. His crime was therefore, that of Jeroboam. If Novatian worshipped the true God, so did Korah. Why there could not have been a second church at Rome, if the number of converts had justified it, was neither asked, nor answered. That all new assemblies were heretical, soon became, by his influence, the popular opinion. Cyprian contended that those who are in error, have not the Holy Spirit; that this is necessary to him who baptizes; because he who baptizes, remits sins. He affirmed also, that the water must be made clean, sanctified by the priest; "that it may be able to wash away the sins of him who is baptized," which is proved by the passage "I will pour clean water upon you and ye shall be clean." (1) From such reasonings he concluded, that their ordinations and their baptisms were void. Firmilianus, bishop of Cesarea in Cappadocia, in his letter to Cyprian (g) says of all heretics, "that if they divide themselves from the church of God, they can have nothing of power or of grace; seeing all power and grace are placed in the church, where the elders preside, who pos (e) Adulterum et contrarium caput extra ecclesiam. p. 231. (f) pp. 295, 296, 300. (g) Epist. 75. "in ecclesia constituta sit, ubi præsident majores natu, qui et baptizandi, et manum imponendi, ordinandi possident potestatem.' |
