Imágenes de página
PDF
ePub

whole fociety to exercife the functions of Government, they, or a majority of them, appointed perfons, in whom they repofed most confidence, to act as governors, and invested them with fufficient powers for that purpose.

In

"Thus, according to this fyftem, Government is a delegation iffuing from the people, and its power is entirely derived from them. But the people, the only fource of authority, did not part with their original right. They retained their fuppofed Sovereignty and the power, which iffued from them in the firft inftance, depends, for its continuance, on the ftreams which flow from the fountain head. fact, as thefe vifionaries contend, the powers of Government are merelý a truft, created by the people, which they, at all times, are intitled to recal, and to veft, at their difcretion, in other hands. They are always free to difplace the governors whom they have appointed, and to punish them for mal-administration-to diffolve the Government which they have created, and to choose a new one, in whatever form and manner they think proper; over which they will, of course, have the fame controul as they had over the first, and fo on, ad infinitum, or, at least, till time shall be no more.

"Thefe crude and unnatural fpeculations, refpecting the origin of Government, had long floated in the minds of men, and had been often used as a pretext, by factious and turbulent characters, to difturb the order of fociety, when they acquired an unfortunate refpectability and influence, from being feriously adopted and strenuously fupported by Mr. Locke. That writer moulded them into a system which has fince been the creed of a party, who, under the denomina. tion of Whigs, confider themfelves as the only friends to civil liberty. In his Treatife on Civil Government, Mr. Locke made the world a prefent which has proved fatal to its repofe and happinefs. In the moft elaborate manner he there contends, that, men are by nature free, equal, and independent'—that no one can be put out of this eftate, and fubjected to the political power of another, or put on the bonds of civil fociety, without his own confent'that such confent is the only beginning of lawful government'—that it is falfe to infer, that, because men are born under government, they are naturally fubjects to it,' or that they are not at liberty to begin a new one-for no man can, by any compact whatever, bind his children or pofterity; a child is born a fubject of no country or government, but is merely under his father's tuition and authority, till he comes to age of difcretion, and then he is a freeman, at liberty what government to put himself under.'

"There is no doubt that Mr. Locke thought the above system of fociety cffential to the existence of freedom, and that, under this impreffion, instead of examining, candidly and impartially, whether it was really founded in nature, or confiftent with reafon, he determined, at all hazards, to maintain it; and, like an advocate wishing only to triumph over his adverfary, (Sir Robert Filmer,) he bent his whole faculties to the fupport of his hypothefis. That such a fyftem is most inimical to the liberties of mankind, will be fhewn hereafter. But

But to prove that it is impracticable, Mr. Locke is certainly the beft poffible evidence. This, with that inconfiftency which is ever the fate of fyftem-mongers, he has completely done. For, having afferted that individual confent is the only beginning of lawful government,' and contended for the abfolute right of every individual, though born under a government fo inftituted, when he comes of age to refuse subjection to it, he foon finds that the focial machine cannot be thus kept in motion. He therefore feeks for another principle, fomewhat lefs abfurd, indeed, but equally inapplicable to a itate of society; and he gets rid of his difficulty by velting, in a majority, the right of binding the other members of his felf-created community. But he was not aware that, in establishing his fanciful and impracticable right of majorities, he overthrew the very principle of individual confent which he had made the foundation of his whole fyftem. For he fays, If the confent of the majority fhall not, in reason, be received, as the act of the whole, and conclude every individual, nothing but the confent of every individual can make any thing to be the act of the whole. But fuch a confent is next to impoffible ever to be had, if we confider the infirmities of health, and avocations of business, which in a number, though much less than that of a commonwealth, will neceffarily keep many away from the public affembly. To which, if we add the variety of opinions, and contrariety of intereft, which unavoidably happen in all collections of men, the coming into fociety upon fuch terms would be only like Cato's coming into the theatre, only to go out again. Such a conftitution as this would make the mighty Leviathan of a fhorter duration than the feebleft creatures, and not let it out-laft the day it was born in ; which cannot be fuppofed, till we can think that rational creatures fhall defire and conftitute focieties only to be diffolved; for where the majority cannot conclude the reft, there they cannot act as one body, and, confequently, will be immediately diffolved again." Pp. 90-95. (To be continued.)

ART. IV. Eight Sermons preached (as Lady Moyer's Lectures) in the Cathedral Church of St. Paul, London, in the Year 1757. To which is added, a Latin Oration, Spoken in the Hall, at Magdalen College, Oxford, on the Founder's Day, July 22, 1733. By William Clements, A. M. then Curate of St. Mary at Hill, London; now Librarian at Sion College. 8vo. Pp. 197. Rivingtons. Price 5s.

1797.

Tis with infinite fatisfaction that we can review fome oldfashioned divinity. The good and pious Mr. Clements, at the age of eighty-eight, has published a volume of Lady Moyer's Lectures, preached by himfelf, more than

NO. VII. VOL. II.

D

forty

forty years ago. To the difgrace of the perfons who have a right to nominate the lecturers on this pious eftablishment, we are furprized to find, that "the custom of annually appointing a new preacher on this inftitution has been difcontinued for feveral years." On a farther enquiry relative to the antidotes which the wifdom of our forefathers had prepared to counteract the poifon of fectaries, Arians, Socinians, Sabellians, and Unitarians, we learn, to our great forrow, that at least an equal neglect of duty, or a falfely refined fyftem of moderation, has prevented the nomination of a lecturer at Bow church, agreeably to the foundation of the great Boyle!!! Hence we cannot but infer, that negligence, at leaft, has prevailed in the preachers of the fee of Canterbury, and the cathedral of St. Paul's. We now fimply afk, in the language of the acute and learned Dean of Gloucefter, "whofe bufinefs it is to prevent the mifchiefs arifing from thefe abuses? and whofe duty it is to undertake the cure?"--Of these eight lectures, the two firit contain a difplay of the truth and importance of the doctrine of the ever-blelled Trinity in Unity; by fhewing the ncceffity of a determinate faith, and rightly understanding the fcripture-doctrine concerning the three Perfons, into whofe name we have been baptized: the two next difplay the real and effential divinity of the Son of God, and the perfonal union of the divine and human natures in him; this is proved from feripture, compared with feripture, and illuftrated by antiquity, its beft interpreter, which fhews, that the doctrine of three Perfons, in the unity of the Godhead, is that faith: the fifth and fixth exhibit the doctrine of the fall and redemption of mankind, in which the author endeavours to prove, in oppofition to the Socinian herefy, the fact both of our fall in Adam, and our recovery in Jefus Chrift; that on the reality and connection of these two great events, the whole of revealed religion turns; and that on thefe the truth and confiftency of the books, both of the Old and New Testament, manifeftly depend in the feventh, having previously confidered the nature and perfon of our bleffed Redeemer, he pro ceeds to confider the Holy Ghoft in the fame refpects, viz. as to his nature and perfon, that he is a perfon diftinct from the Father and the Son, and truly God, in unity of effence with the Father and the Son, the infpirer, enlightener, and fanctifier of the faithful: and, in the last lecture, having previously confidered the truth and importance of thefe great doctrines of our common falvation, it remains that he fhould exhort us in the words of the Apoftle, in his text, "earnestly to contend for this faith," as its truth and importance deferve.

The infolence, arrogance, and dogmatical affumption of the confequential Doctors Price and Priestley, Meff. Wake

field,

field, Blfham, and Paine, that have stigmatized with the title of indifcreet effrontery," (Analytical Review, P. 568, an. 1798,) the exertions of Horfley, Whitaker, Boucher, and Daubeny, to prevent fchifms in our church, compel us to adopt a retrograde review, and to commence our observations with an extract from the eighth fermon ;-

"For, let us only afk, what are creeds but fummaries of the Chrif tian faith, which the church, like a tender mother, provides for the inftruction of her children in the faith into which they have been baptized, by giving its effential and important articles in a short and comprehenfive view, as in the Apoftles' Creed. Or, if we confider the Nicene and Athanafian Creeds, they teach no other gofpel or doctrine, no new articles of faith, but are only a more explicit declaration of the fenfe in which the church always understood the Apoftles' Creed, and, indeed, the fcriptures themfelves; and were drawn up as an antidote to the falfe doctrines and interpretations of the facred writings, ftrenuously propagated by Arius, Sabellius, and other heretics. Now, what can be more difingenuous-what bafer artifice invented to delude the unwary, than this used by the heretics of the prefent age, in declaiming against creeds in general? Every one who acknowledges the holy fcripture for the rule of his faith muft and will affert his own fenfe of it, in important doctrinal points; and that fenfe, which he teaches and contends for, is his creed, as much as the Nicene and Athanafian is ours. Why, then, do they clamour against us for doing what they do themfelves? The Arians and Socinians induftriously propagate their notions; let them, therefore, if they can, give a reason why the catholic church of Chrift may not confult its edification by publishing its own true and ancient creed, or fenfe of fcripture-doctrine of the Trinity, with as much zeal as they confult its deftruction, by publishing their new and falje creeds!

"To evade this question they will, perhaps, tell us that they make no creeds.' But it is already evident, that to affert and propagate one fenfe of the words of fcripture in oppofition to another, is to make and publish a creed. If they do it not in an authoritative manner, this is only because they have not thought proper to refign, for confcience fake, their stations in the church; nor the churches of England and Ireland, in their prefent unhappy ftate with regard to difcipline, to reject and deprive them. If they could once unite in a feparate body, or, which feems more defirable to them, could get a majority, it is probable we should foon fee the Nicene and Athanafan Creeds condemned as heretical, and a new one formed in favour of Arianifm or Socinianifm.

"In the mean time let us fee, and examine a little, what they propofe to us as a means of giving fome cafe to their own confciences, and putting an end to difputes concerning the faith. The chief thing propofed to this end is to leffen the number of our creeds, by rejecting the Nicene and Athanafian, and retaining only that called the Apostles' Creed.

[blocks in formation]

This (they fay) is acknowledged to contain all the fundamental articles of the Chriftian faith.** We acknowledge it does contain them all; and fo do the holy feriptures: for it is not the defign of this, or either of the other creeds, to make new articles of faith. Why, then, do these objectors admit any creed, even that called the Apostles? Perhaps they will fay, becaufe the church always required a baptifmal confeffion of faith,' and they are content to admit the Apoftles Creed, as a proper and fufficient form for that purpose. It is fo provided it be understood according to the true and confiftent fenfe of fcripture-doctrine, as profeffed from the beginning in the church of Chrift. And, accordingly, it was, in fact, fufficient in the earlier and purer ages of chriftianity; but when heretical depravers of the faith began to explain away the fenfe of fcripture, whilft they profeffed to believe the words of it, it was very easy to do the fame with the Apostles Creed, which runs almoft entirely in fcripture-terms. Hence arofe a neceffity of afcertaining the true fenfe of fcripture, by a more explicit declaration of its effential and important doctrines, in the Nicene and Athanafian Creeds. The heretics, viz. Arius, Sabellius, &c. were really the aggreffors in creed-making, as they call it; i. e. in propagating their fenfe of the fcripture and of the Apostles Creed, in unfcriptural and metaphyfical terms: the Nicene and Athanafian Creeds are therefore only neceffary antidotes to the falfe creeds that occafioned them; and will continue to be neceifary, as long as the church continues to be infested with the fame herefies.

"It has been objected,† by a diftinguished writer, to the Nicene Creed, that it is nothing but the determination of a number of bishops in the fourth century-that the prefent is a more enlightened age that is the infeparable property of time ever more and more to difcover truth;' and therefore he thinks it unreasonable that we, at this distance of time, should be tied down to their determinations.” Here it will be proper to enquire of the objector, whether this determination of a number of bishops, in the fourth century, was in too late, or in too early, an age, to be venerable and of weight with him? He does not fay it was too late, and fo an innovation upon primitive doctrine, as taught in the fecond and third centuries: he feems to know that antiquity was against him, and therefore fets himfelf against it, by obferving that it is the infeparable property of time ever more and more to difcover truth;' and inferring from thence that the fcripture-doctrine of the Trinity was referved for the difcovery of this enlightened age. But, whatever truths time may have difcovered, yet I will venture to fay, that the faith ONCE delivered

Vide Bishop of Clogher's Speech in the Houfe of Lords, Dublin, fpoken February 2, 1756. Printed for Baldwin and Cooper, 1757. Price 6d.

+Vide Dr. Clayton, Bishop of Clogher's Speech in the Irish Houfe of Lords.

to

« AnteriorContinuar »