Изображения страниц

of the rights of nature should be given up by any one, which ought not to be given up by every member of the fame community. The juft equality of mankind demands fo much.

The defign of the original compact being found to be the defence of the natural rights of mankind; when fuch civil laws, as may be judged adequate to fuch defence, are agreed on, the manner of putting them into execution becomes the next object of confideration, and produces another fort of compact, which is entirely relative to the execution: and hence originate all the various powers and authorities of magiftracy. Here the Writer is led to the examination of the true nature of this kind of compact, which comprehends in it all that is most important to civil liberty and the refult of his inquiry is, that this compact does not give the magiftrates any power independent of the people, or independent of the ends propofed by the people to be accomplished by that power. It does not fix them as lords and masters of the people: it only conftitutes them executors of the laws or determinations of the people, to which they, with the whole community, are equally fubject. The compact, ftrictly speaking, on the part of the people, extends only to the intrufting of the magiftrates with certain portions of power, which are to be exercised in certain modes, with a view to attain ends which may be deemed beneficial to the community at large, and to fupport the magiftrates in the execution and the magiftrates, on their part, are bound to observe the modes, and to pursue the ends, truly and faithfully.

On the whole, fays our Author at the conclufion of the second dialogue, the juft rights of human nature, founded on the divine principles, which the all-wife Creator hath originally impreffed on the human fpecies, are utterly unalienable by any means whatsoever! No rights of princes, no powers of magiflracy, no force of laws, no delufive compacts, grants, or charters, can ever entitle any part of mankind to deprive their fellow-creatures of thefe natural rights! All the nations upon earth (thofe in the moft flavifh, as well as thofe in the most free ftate) poffefs an innate, inherent, and indisputable right, to affert their liberty at all times! Nor can any thing be more glorious than the attempt, founded on juft principles, even if it fail: for then we shall feel the fublime fatisfaction of being actuated by those divine principles, which, from their native truth and beauty, as well as from our inward fenfe of them, we know to be the laws of God!'

The fubject of the third Dialogue is religious Liberty, which is difcuffed with the fame good fenfe and liberality of mind that are difplayed upon the preceding topics. A few expreffions, indeed, have dropped from the Writer, which feem to indicate his not being favourable to revelation; but thefe expreffions. are only incidental. His general fentiments and reasonings, in fupport of the right of mankind to the exercise of a perfect



freedom in religion, provided they do not offend against the juft laws of human nature, have our entire approbation.

ART. III. Lindsey's Sequel to his Apology, continued.


N our Review of the preceding month, we laid before out Readers the general plan of Mr. Lindley's Sequel to his Apology on refigning the Vicarage of Catterick, with some extracts from the three firft chapters of that work. The Author proceeds, in the fourth chapter, to illuftrate and establish the interpretation he has given of the beginning of St. John's gofpel, by references to various paffages of the New Teftament; the import of which he unfolds in popular and perfpicuous language, at the fame time evincing great learning, and a confummate knowledge of the phraseology of scripture.

The particular defign of these references, and of the interpretation our Author has exhibited of them, is to fhew that Chrift received the powers by which he was enabled to execute the part affigned him from the FATHER; i. e. from the Almighty Creator, the great original of all power, and the only fource of wisdom; that the SPIRIT of God, by which Chrift was guided and affifted, was the fame as the Logos or Word mentioned John i. 1.—that the idea of two natures in Chrift is not warranted by holy writ-that by the words Holy Spirit we are not to fuppofe an intelligent agent to be intended diftinct from the person of the Father, but a divine power and giftand lastly, that by the expreffions coming from God, and God dwelling in Chrift, we are only to understand the divine miffion of Jefus, and that high degree of knowledge and power which were communicated to him as the delegate of heaven.

From the paffages commented on in this chapter, among other inferences Mr. Lindfey concludes as follows:

It appears that Chrift's knowledge, wifdom, and power, are uniformly and invariably ascribed to the Spirit of God. This therefore deftroys that most abfurd and unintelligible fiction of two natures in Chrift, the one divine the other human. Because if he had been poffeffed of a divine nature of his own, it would have been fufficient to have inftructed him in every thing, and to have enabled him to work miracles, fo that he would not have stood in need of the Spirit of God, or any foreign help.

These two fuppofed natures in Chrift are the continual refuge both of the learned and unlearned, who will have him at all events, and notwithstanding his own plaineft declarations to the contrary, to be God equal to the Father. When we allege thofe fayings of Chrift, that he was ignorant of fome things, that the Son did not know the day of judgment, but the Father only (Mark xiii. 32.) that his Father was greater than he (John xiv. 28.) that he could do nothing of himfelf (John v. 19.) but received all his power and directions from the Father: the evafion ftraightway is, that all this is spoken of bis


buman nature; as if he were compofed of two perfons, one of which knew, and could do many things, which the other could not know or do, and which the fuperior nature or perfon kept concealed from the other. So that although Christ afferts it of his whole perfon, I myfelf-my Father is greater than I; we are not to believe him; and in direct oppofition to his own words, it is maintained, that the Father is NOT greater than be.'


The promise of the Holy Spirit to the apofles has been much mistaken. And the mistake concerning it has unhappily contributed to bring into the Chriftian Church a new object of worship, a third Divine Perfon, unknown to the Jews intirely, and to Chriftians for the first three centuries.-But our Lord peaks of the Spirit as a perfon only in the fame manner as Wifdem, Prov. viii. and Charity, 1 Cor. xiii. have perfonal acts attributed to them. And as the intent of beftowing this Holy Spirit or miraculous power on the apoftles was to enable them more effectually to propagate his gospel, he describes it under the character of another advo.ate, or afliftant that would be fent to them, to remind them of what he had taught them, and to qualify and affift them in teaching the fame to others.

That not a real Divine Perfon is here intended, but only the extraordinary miraculous gifts which should be bestowed on his followers, is fully proved:

1. Because our Lord himself, a little before he took his final leave of his apofiles, calls it a power or gift from God: Luke xxiv. 49. Behold I fend the promise of the Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerufalem, until ye be endowed with power from on high.

2. Because his words plainly intimate, that he spoke not of a perfon, when he fays, John xiv. 26. the Comforter, the Holy Ghost (not as we render it, which is the Holy Ghoft) whom the Father will jend. For here he himself explains to them, that by the Comforter he meant the Holy Spirit; and as they were Jews, they would not be at a loss to understand that he spoke of the fame Holy Spirit or power, by which their ancient prophets had been infpired to do miracles, and to deliver the oracles of God.

3. Because in the As of the Apostles, and in the other books of the New Testament, where we have an account of the fulfilment of the promise of Christ, and of the particular miffion of the Holy Spirit, we do not find any intelligent agent or perfon introduced, but only extraordinary divine powers bestowed on the apostles and their converts.'

The fifth chapter of the Sequel contains matter of great importance to the juft conception of Mr. Lindley's question. He founds the utmolt depth of argument, fo far as the fcriptures of the New Teftament are concerned, by which the maintainers of the PRE-EXISTENCE of Jefus fupport that doctrine. He proves that the gospel of St. John was not written to evince the divinity of Chrift-that the various paffages of hat Evangelift, which have been alleged in evidence of this doctrine, admit of a much more commodious interpretation

REV. Oct. 1776.



upon other principles-and that the afferting of fuch doârine could not poffibly have been the intention of the writer of them. He then proceeds to examine the most important texts taken from the other writers of the New Teftament, which have been supposed to bear relation to this fubject—and, dif daining all other authorities, confirms his own interpretation or paraphrafe by the aid of the rules of found criticism applied to the words of fcripture: certainly the moft judicious and unexceptionable mode of procefs that can be conceived, and indeed the only one which can with any confiftency be adopted by a Proteftant divine.

The following extracts will afford an idea of our Author's execution of this part of his defign:

It was the fentiment of fome ancient Chriftian writers, who have therein been much followed by modern commentators, that the three Evangelists Matthew, Mark, Luke, fpeak only of fuch things as belonged to Chrift as a man: but that the apofile John, in his gofpel, treats of Christ's divine nature, or ftate before he was born of the Virgin Mary; and that having perufed their writings, and obferved their deficiency in this refpect, he undertook to fupply it. "So that (fays Theophylact) what none of the other Evangelifts have taught us, he (John) has thundered forth. For as they confined their narratives to what happened to Chrift in the body, and Speak nothing clearly or exprefsly of eternal generation; it was to be feared that fome earthly-minded fouls, who had no relish for what was truly fublime, would thence imagine that Chrift had no existence from the Father before he was born of Mary: which was really the cafe with Paul, Bishop of Samofata: and therefore the great John relates his heavenly generation."


It has been fhewn above, and will hereafter more fully appear, that our Evangelift does not defcribe Chrift in any other capacity, but as a man extraordinarily commiffioned and impowered by God; or intimate any prior exiflence belonging to him before his birth of Mary; nor does he differ from his fellow Evangelifts on this point, unless it be that he more industriously and at large records thofe fayings of Jefus, in which he declared that he received his being and all his powers from God.'

( John xvii. 5. "And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own felf, with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.” It has been too haftily and erroneously concluded from this part of Chrift's prayer, that he is afking Almighty God to bestow upon him fomething of which he had been in poffeffion before the world was; but which he had voluntarily relinquished when he had his birth from his mother Mary. How little foundation there is for fuch a conclufion will appear by attending to the following circumstances pointed out by our Lord himself, in this very prayer, viz. 1. the date and commencement of that glory which he requests; 2. hiss manner of fpeaking concerning the fhare which his difciples were to have with him in it; 3. the nature of the glory itself. For,

1. He himself fays, ver. 4, 5. I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do: and now, O Father, glorify thou me, &c. This fhews that the glory he prayed for was to be fubfequent to the faithful difcharge of his duty to God in this life, and the reward of it. He declares the fame, Luke xxiv. 26. Ought not the Chrift to have Juffered these things and to enter into his glory? And fo alfo 1 Pet. i. 10, 11. Of which falvation the prophets have enquired; Searching what or what manner of time the spirit of Christ which was in them did fignify, when it teftified beforehand the fufferings of Chrift, and the glory that should follow. So that his glory was fomething hitherto unpoffeffed and future.

2. Verse 22. He fays-the glory which thou gavest (rather hast given) me, I have given them. Obferve his words carefully. The glory that he fpeaks of, God, he fays, had given to him. Not that it was already beftowed upon him; for then there would have been no occafion to pray for it. But the heavenly Father had promifed to beftow it; and therefore he speaks of it as already given, because by the promife of God, which can never fail it was as fully his own, as if he had been in actual poffeffion of it.

And in like fort, he had given this glory, he here faith, to his difciples, i. e. promifes it to them (John xiv. 1, 2, 3. and at other times) had given it to them by promife, and thereby infured it to them as much as if they were already poffeffed of it.

And therefore, as our Lord fays, that his Father had given him the glory he prays for, though it was not yet bellowed, but only promised to him: fo does he fay, that he had glory with God before the world was not that he had really been in poffeffion of it before the world was, but because it was destined for him by God, known unto whom are all his works from the beginning, Ats xv. 18. In the fame manner, 2 Tim. i. 9. Eph. i. 4. God is faid to have chefen us, and, to have given us his grace before the foundation of the world, before the world began; although we had then affuredly no being. And Matt. xxv. 34, where our Lord defcribes the bleffing of those who fhall have promoted his gofpel, the caufe of truth and righteoufnefs: The fays, Come, ye bleffed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the beginning of the world. He might have faid, inherit the kingdom which you have had with God before the foundation of the world.”

3. What is the glory that Christ here requels the heavenly Father to bestow upon him?

We may affure ourfelves, that as all prayer ever ought to be, fo Chrift's prayer now would be fuited to his character, prefent circumftances, defires, and expectations. What then fo proper and natural for the holy and benevolent Jefus, at the clofe of life, to alk of the Supreme Father, and fovereign difpofer of all things, as the fuccefs of that gofpel, by which the virtue and happidefs of mankind was to be promoted; which had been his fole aim and purfuit, for which he had lived, and for which he was about to die! to fuppofe him to pray for his own private happinefs and advancement; and to animate himself with a profpect of that from God, as in the com. mon opinion of the glory he fought, would not be fuitable to that

T 2


« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »