« PreviousContinue »
tries to subvert some of the fundamental laws of the realm. This nefarious prac tice of confounding small and great things, is either a weakness or a delusion, that belongs to the whole party, and what they exhibit in common with the Papists now and in former ages. It is one of those things which our Reformers had to expose and condemn in their day.
"As we close our remarks, we shall say a few words on the term Catholic. Many are fonder of this word than they ought to be. They seem to think, that every thing is right, if it be Catholic; than which nothing can be more preposterous and false. It has been, and is so used, or rather abused, that it would be well to discard it wholly. It was the talisman of the Papists at the. Reformation, as it is now of the Tractarians, and is regarded by some, more important than the term Scriptural. But Scriptural, and not Catholic, is the Protestant term. We make no over-statement when we say, that there is quite as much of Catholic error as there is of Catholic truth, and even more. And we might venture to assert, that we could mention more errors and superstitions bearing that name, than scriptural truths and practices. Let us therefore dismiss the name, so long as it accredits what is erroneous, foolish, absurd and even idolatrous and demoralizing, as well as what is true, wise and holy. In the name itself we glory, were it rightly applied; namely, to the pure doctrines of Scripture, to a scriptural ordering of the household of faith, and to that family, part in heaven aud part on earth, which compose the mystical body of Christ." But to the name when prostituted, as by the Tractarians, to include as of the family of God all that is superstitious, and idolatrous, and vile, and worldly, and carnal and antichristian, if it can only trace an outward connection with the apostles, similar, though not so distinct or intimate, as that of the Jews, who crucified the Lord, with Abraham-to the use of the name, so prostituted and disgraced, we decidedly object."
The subject of the types contained in Holy Scripture has excited much attention, since the discussion as to their application to the question of Church Establishments, in which the Rev. Hugh M'Neile and the Rev. Dr. Wardlaw have taken the chief parts. The following remarks upon the subject are from the pen of the Rev. W. L. Alexander of Edinburgh, whose volume on "The Connexion and Harmony of the Old and New Testaments" abounds with valuable matter :
"The fact is, as it appears to me, that resemblance does not enter necessarily into the idea of a type at all. The essential element of a type is associative or suggestive capacity, i. e., the power of calling vividly before the mind something which is itself absent. Now, this may exist, either with or without resemblance; just as in the case of words, where a particular sound, or combination of sounds, may become the invariable symbol of certain ideas, between which and the sound the liveliest fancy can trace no vestige of a resemblance. The main point in all such cases is, that the mind has acquired a habit of connecting the two together, so that on the perception of the one, may invariably follow the conception of the other. Of course, where resemblance exists, so much the better, both as regards the certainty and the vividness of the consequent conception; and the general presence of this in a type, conspires to give that mode of teaching one great advantage over mere verbal instructions. Still it seems essential to a right view of this matter, and to its deliverance from the mass of absurdities under which it has been crushed, that we should bear in mind, that it is as possible for a type to exist without any natural resemblance to its antitype, as it is for a word to be the sign of an idea to which it bears no analogy, real or supposed.
"But it may be asked, if the essence of a type consists in its power of calling before the mind a vivid conception of its antitype, by what is this power itself determined? In other words, how comes the type to possess this faculty? I answer, by the express appointment of Him by whom the type was ordained. According to the definition, it is an institution created for the express purpose of foreshadowing the great truths of the Christian revelation. Its adaptation for this purpose,
then, is derived primarily from the fact of its appointment. There may be, and in general there is, besides this, a natural adaption for this purpose, arising from the intended similarity between the type and the antitype; but this seems rather to serve the purpose of keeping up the habit of connecting the two together, than to have originally created that habit. In the course of time, perhaps, the habit becomes so confirmed, that, as is the case with words, people yield to it without any thought or inquiry as to its origin; but, in the first instance, it could only have been by their being expressly told that such and such acts and objects were desigued by God to picture to them such and such truths of Christianity, that any associate connection came to be established between the one and the other.
"The truth upon this head has been briefly, but very clearly aud forcibly expressed by the late Bishop Marsh, in the following terms:-To constitute one thing the type of another, as the term is generally undersood in reference to Scripture, something more is wanted than mere resemblance. The former must not only resemble the latter, but must have been designed to resemble the latter. must have been so designed in its original institution. It must have been designed as something preparatory to the latter. The type, as well as the antitype, must have been pre-ordained; and they must have been pre-ordained, as constituent parts of the same general scheme of Divine providence. It is this previous design and this pre-ordained connection which constitute the relation of type and antitype.
"The importance of the principle here announced, must be allowed by all who have paid any attention to the history of typical theology. To the neglect of it, are in a great measure to be traced, those exegetical monstrosities which have brought a stigma not only upon the doctrine of the types, but upon all spiritual interpretation of Scripture together, proceeding upon the assumption, that every thing in the Old Testament was typical of something in the New, and that the only criterion of a type was the resemblance between it and its antitype. Men of lively imaginations have revelled in the exercise afforded to their ingenuity by the multiplication of such resemblances, until they have left nothing that can be regarded as simply historical in the whole of the Old Testament. Error has thus found a cheap method of defence; for what more easy than to find some person, or action, or ordinance which might be shown to bear a resemblance to the opinion in question, and consequently to confer upon that opinion a Divine sanction? Truth has by the same means received many an injury; for what can be more detrimental to a good cause than to rest its defence upon baseless analogies and fanciful comparisons? And worst, perhaps, of all, the friends of Christianity, by treating the histories of Scripture as if they were mere contrivances for the adumbration of spiritual truths, in other words mere fables, have taught its enemies first to doubt, and then boldly to deny the truth of those histories; and they so sap the very foundation upon which our religion rests.
"The safeguard against such extravagance is, to keep fast hold of the principle, that nothing is to be viewed as a type which cannot be shown to have been expressly appointed to be such by God."
Review of Books.
ROMANISM AND ANGLO-CATHOLICISM. Lectures, by JOSEPH SORTAIN, A.B., of Trinity College, Dublin, and Minister of North Street Chapel, Brighton. cl. bds. pp. 290.
Ward and Co. Paternoster Row.
is after the working of Satan, with all power and signs and lying wonders." And here our author enters into an interesting examination of prodigies and miracles, not of the Divine handiwork ; such as those wrought by the magicians of Egypt, and those spoken of in Deuteronomy xiii, and in Matthew xxiv. 24.
We have as yet followed Mr. Sortain no further than his view of the first of the seven characteristics of the arch- The common explanation, that the reapostacy, indicated by St. Paul-Im-sults of the Egyptian enchantments were pious Arrogance. The second is-Sa- mere counterfeits of miracles, and not tanic wonder-working: "Whose coming actual miracles, is here properly stig
matised as "painfully unsatisfactory,' and leaving upon the mind the uncomfortable impression of "special pleading;" and on the whole we conclude with Mr. Sortain, that it is possible for Satanic agency to perform wonders, to detect the deception of which no tests of human scrutiny are adequate. And if the question be put, Wherein, then, lies the force of miracles as a species of evidence?—the just and true answer is here suggested: a miracle is to be tested by the character of the truth which it proposes to substantiate, and no miracle can be received as a testimony to moral truth unless it meets with moral acquiescence.
These principles being laid down and illustrated, it is first shown, that the Church of Rome still claims the power of performing miracles, and secondly it is argued, that such of them as are authentic have been Satanic in their origin. There is no attempt to discredit the testimony as to all the "lying wonders" of Rome, and we venture to think such an attempt (though commonly made) extremely unsuccessful; the true ground is that which is taken in this volumethat they cannot abide the moral test. They are wrought in support of imageworship, purgatory, transubstantiation, and other things contrary to the revealed truth of God.
most agreeable to our own desires, though we see it to be less probable than the other-(whereas God's Word saith, "He that doubteth is damned if he eat"); that he sins least, who holds himself to be bound by the law in fewest things, and therefore it is better to follow the less rigid opinion; also that an action is not sinful unless the agent have reflected upon its sinfulness, and if the perpetrator of a crime have his thoughts fixed upon some good object, it ceases to be sin.
The fourth characteristic is-confusion of moral distinctions : "having their conscience seared with a hot iron." And the Jesuits teach, with other such things, that servants are excused if they only steal from their masters enough to compensate them for their wages being unjustly small; that is not sin, to take an oath with a mental reservation altering its apparent nature; that a Jesuit is under obligation even to sin, if the superior for the general good command him so to do.
Turning to our own times, in reference to these last two characteristics, Mr. Sortain observes, on the one, that the partial suppression of truth is the beginning of untruth, and "reserve in preaching the atonement" leaves the mind under the impression of a falsehood; and on the other, that the first essay of moral subtlety is the first step to moral confusion, and they have undeniably entered npon this downward road, who maintain that a man may subscribe the Articles of the Church of England and yet hold the Romanist faith.
But we cannot, in the present Number, conclude our analysis of this seasonable and valuable treatise.
RELIGIOUS TRACT SOCIETY'S ALMANACKS. 1842.
THOUGH straightened for room this month, we must not overlook these seasonable publications. Here is the sixpenny "Christian Almanack," with its 76 pages of valuable and useful information, and the Penny Sheet and Penny Pocket Almanack; and each, with its "text for every day in the year. "Christian! are you ashamed to exhibit such an almanack in your counting-house, or produce it from your pocket?
END OF VOLUME XIII.