Εικόνες σελίδας
PDF
Ηλεκτρ. έκδοση

moralizing who saves; or, it is Jesus practicing who saves; or, it is Jesus loving who saves; or, it is Jesus dying who saves; or, it is Jesus rising from the grave who saves. Now we untie not the bundle to select a staff, lest we might choose a broken reed that would break beneath our hand, we say simply, "It is Jesus who saves," and, like the trembling woman, who pressed by the crowd against the robe of Christ, was healed of her disease, we believe that whatever fold of his garments we may touch in faith, a virtue will proceed therefrom to save our souls!

Still, to prevent misrepresentation, we think it right to state, that when we speak of the mission of Christ in all its extent, as being the means of salvation, we mean to include "his doctrine, his life, his sacrifice, his voluntary death, and his glorious resurrection." With such a statement as this before them, we do not understand how any one can reproach us with overlooking the death of Christ, or neglecting to view it as a sacrifice! Such is the difficulty of reaching the conscience of the sinner, that it required an event like the death of Jesus, followed by his resurrection from the grave, to compel conviction and anticipate cavil; and that Christ took this view of the case is evident from his own words, when speaking of his life, he says "No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again." We regard his death as a sacrifice, because it was perfectly voluntary on his part, Christ might have invoked the presence of the legions of angels who waited his command, instead of following his executioners to the hill of Calvary. But he chose death as the dictate of duty and the will of God and by his death he filled up the measure of his humility and obedience; he completed his work, and sealed our reconciliation with the Father. By this death he has vanquished death, he offers himself an innocent victim "to satisfy divine justice and holiness," meaning thereby that he has thus fulfilled the plans and accomplished the will of God; by his death "he has blotted out our transgressions," meaning thereby that his perfect virtues have been appointed of God a means of fully and truly purging us from sin. Under all these aspects it is perfectly true to say, that "Christ has been made sin for us," that "he bore our sins on his own body upon the tree," meaning that the sins of the world caused or required his death, and finally, that “he was delivered for our offences, wounded for our transgressions,

:

and buried for our iniquities," and that, "we who were afar off are made nigh by the blood of Christ;" these last words being an allusion to the mode in which the Jews approached the presence of God in the sacred ark, by sprinkling the blood of the sacrifices on the altar.

Such is a statement of our faith. We refuse to add to it, as ancient orthodoxy demands, propositions such as the following: "That God has punished Jesus, the just and the holy, instead of punishing us the unjust and the guilty; that the weight of the eternal punishment merited by the entire number of the elect, has been placed in one mighty mass upon the head of the innocent," and that this has been done by that God, the foundations of whose throne are justice and equity, and who has expressly declared "the soul that sinneth it shall die."

We conclude with one reflection, and with reference to a single text. The sin and incredulity of men rendered the death of Christ necessary to the salvation of the world; but to make the salvation of mankind absolutely and unconditionally to depend upon an event which itself depended upon the free will of man, seems a manifest contradiction. An event cannot be unavoidable or necessary, if the agents concerned in it are free. Now the betrayal, the condemnation, and the death of Christ, are they, or are they not to be regarded as crimes? And could not mankind have been saved, and God reconciled, unless Judas had sold his master, unless Caiphas had unjustly condemned him, unless Herod had been a mocker, and Pilate a coward? We leave St. Paul to reply: "If the princes of this world had known the wisdom of God, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory."

[blocks in formation]

My Father leads me on-through darkest night

I fear no meteor's false and wandering light

Though e'en the heavenly hosts were quenched and dim,

Light should not fail my steps, led on by him—

The path before me wherefore should I see?

God sees it clear !

Then, onward still! and tranquil let me be,

For he is near!

My Father leads me on—Though wild the place,

I pass, protected by his love and grace

He leaves me not when sorrow bows my head,
And not unnumbered fall the tears I shed-
Though ills at morn and evening on me press,
He knows each care-

Then to His Word I turn, my soul to bless,
And find Him there!-

My Father leads me on-He points the way—
'Tis his to choose--'tis mine but to obey-

He leaves me not-though night and gloom surround,
Will faith and holy trust the more abound-

What though the waves of fate are dashing high,
God still is near-

Then, as they break, exulting will I cry,

The Lord is here!

L. R.

OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF PRESBYTERIANISM, IN IRELAND.

BY THE REV. H. MONTGOMERY, LL. D.

(Continued from No. VII. Vol. II. page 234.)

Not long after the introduction of the Secession Church, another and older scion of Scotch Presbyterianism took some root in Ulster; and for the better understanding of its plantation and progress, it will be necessary to remind my readers in a few sentences, of some points already detailed in these outlines.

In the year 1580, the King, the parliament, the clergy, and nearly the whole people of Scotland subscribed "The National Covenant," which, in the foulest terms abused, and renounced the Roman Catholic religion; and expressed the unalterable determination of the entire kingdom "to maintain the true Christian Faith revealed to the world by the blessed Evangel." This covenant was almost universally subscribed, shortly afterwards, by the Scottish settlers and ministers of Ireland; and subsequently renewed, in Scotland, on several important occasions. At the commencement of the civil wars, in England, the people of Scotland embraced the opportunity of renouncing episcopacy, which Charles I. had been unwise enough to force upon them; and the English parliament being equally hostile to that form of church government, prudently endeavoured to secure the co-operation of their Scottish brethren,

by proposing to join them in a solemn compact for the total extirpation both of Popery and Prelacy, from the entire realm of Britain. Acting upon this suggestion, Commissioners from the Scotch and English parliaments consulted with the divines engaged at Westminster in drawing up the Confession of Faith; and a Compact was speedily entered into, under the title of the Solemn League and Covenant, for the reformation and defence of religion, within the three kingdoms of Scotland, England, and Ireland." This Covenant, which bound the high contracting parties to the extirpation of Prelacy as well as of Popery, "was subscribed" by all ranks in Scotland, England, and Ireland, in the year 1643: and Charles II. subsequently subscribed it at Spey, June 23d, 1650, and, again, when he was crowned at Scoon, Jan. 1st, 1651-thus becoming, to the great delight of the Scottish people, "a covenanted king." His accession to the throne in 1660, was therefore hailed with enthusiasm; and the Scotch calculated on seeing Presbyterianism established by law, as the national religion-being already the national religion in point of fact.

This expectation, however, was doomed to experience a speedy and signal disappointment. Presbyterianism was a religion too democratic to please the taste of an arbitrary monarch; and Charles consequently, was scarcely seated on the throne, when, in utter defiance of his twice repeated vow, he turned round, with all the ingratitude of the fabled viper, upon the very party that had raised him to power. In England, his first step was to restore that very Prelacy which he had twice sworn "to extirpate;" his second step was to pass the infamous Act of Uniformity, through the operation of which, in obedience to the dictates of conscience, two thousand Presbyterian ministers were driven from their churchesor, perhaps, I should rather say, they nobly resigned livings which they could not retain without a sinful conformity; although Calamy and Baxter were tempted by the offer of bishopricks, and many others had the lure of deaneries, archdeaconries, and other splendid settlements, cast before them. His third step was to prevail upon a servile parliament to pass the Conventicle Act, by which the ejected ministers and all other dissenters were prohibited, under the severest penalties, from assembling to worship God!

In Scotland, the laws which sanctioned episcopacy had never been formally abrogated, and the Bishops resumed their sees as a matter

of course. Against this violation of "the Covenant," the Scotch Presbyterians loudly remonstrated, and sent the Rev. James Sharpe, one of their principal Ministers, to lay their remonstrance before the King. The result proved the fidelity with which he executed his commission: he came back from London, Archbishop of St. Andrews, and appointed, likewise, to the highest station in the civil administration of Scotland! This infamous traitor became the ferocious and unrelenting persecutor of the honest Presbyterians whose confidence he had betrayed; and, during the fifteen years in which he exercised great authority, the annals of Scotland are written with tears and blood. Charles, no doubt, had been disgusted⚫ with the austerity and over-bearing rudeness of the Scotch Clergy, in his earlier years, which caused him often to say, that "Presbyterianism was no religion for a gentleman"; but, he ought at the same time to have remembered, that to Presbyterians he owed his throne, and all its power for good or evil. Unhappily, that power was alone directed to the promotion of evil; and the base and perjured Parliament of Scotland, in ready anticipation of his wishes, not only passed an Act of Uniformity and a Conventicle Act, similar to those of England, but, according to Hume, "quartered a military force upon the people, commanded by a drunken ruffian, named Sir James Turner, who obtained from the episcopal clergy lists of those who absented themselves from Church, and treated them with the greatest indignity." Every Minister who had been elected by the people, and who had not been ordained by a bishop, was ordered, on pain of instant dismissal, to submit to episcopal ordination and induction. Unhappily, too many complied with this infamous demand; and yet, three hundred and fifty upright men, chiefly in the western counties, had the courage to brave all the evils of poverty, and all the terrors of arbitrary power, sustained by ecclesiastical rancour and military intimidation. With these honest men, the great mass of people deeply sympathized; but, as usual, in religious concerns, the nobility and gentry manifested little integrity; and the multitude, without leaders, without means, without organization, were unable to throw off the yoke that galled them. Still, however, they did not tamely submit to the oppressions which they endured. Many of them suffered plunder, insults, and the greatest indignities from the soldiery, rather than enter the episcopal churches: their faithful Ministers prayed and preached from house to house; and the glens and mountains echoed by night

« ΠροηγούμενηΣυνέχεια »