A denomination of eastern Christians, which derive their name from Iberia, a province of Asia now called Georgia: hence they are also called Georgians. Their tenets are said to be the same with those of the Greek church; which see.
or ICONOCLASTAE, breakers of images: a name
which the church or Rome gives to all who reject the use of images in religious
matters. The word is Greek, formed from imago, and rumpere, "to
break." In this sense not only the reformed, but some of the eastern
churches, are called iconoclastes, and esteemed by them heretics, as opposing
the worship of the images of God and the saints, and breaking their figures and
representations in churches.
The opposition to images began in Greece, under
the reign of Bardanes, who was created emperor of the Greeks a little after the
commencement of the eighth century, when the worship of them became common. See
IMAGE. But the tumults occasioned by it were quelled by a revolution, which, in
713, deprived Bardanes of the imperial throne. The dispute, however, broke out
with redoubled fury under Leo the Isaurian, who issued out an edict in the year
726, abrogating, as some say, the worship of images; and ordering all the
images, except that of Christ's crucifixion, to be removed out of the churches;
but, according to others, this edict only prohibiting the paying to them any
kind of adoration or worship. This edict occasioned a civil war, which broke
out in the islands of the Archipelago, and, by the suggestions of the priests
and monks, ravaged a part of Asia, and afterwards reached Italy. The civil
commotions and insurrections in Italy were chiefly promoted by the Roman
pontiffs, Gregory I. and II. Leo was excommunicated; and his subjects in the
Italian provinces violated their allegiance, and rising in arms, either
massacred or banished all the emperor's deputies and officers. In consequence
of these proceedings, Leo assembled a council at Constantinople in 730, which
degraded Germanus, bishop of that city, who was a patron of images; and he
ordered all the images to be publicly burnt, and inflicted a variety of severe
punishments upon such as were attached to that idolatrous worship. Hence arose
two factions, one of which adopted the adoration and worship of images, and on
that account were called iconoduli or inconolatrae; and the other maintained
that such worship was unlawful, and that nothing was more worthy the zeal of
Christians than to demolish and destroy those statues and pictures which were
the occasion of this gross idolatry; and hence they were distinguished by the
titles of icono-machi (from image, and I contend) and iconoclastae. the zeal of
Gregory II. in favour of image worship was not only irritated, but even
surpassed, by his successor Gregory III. in consequence of which the Italian
provinces were torn from the Grecian empire. Constantine, called Copronimus, in
754, convened a council at Constantinople, regarded by the Greeks as the
seventh aecumenical council, which solemnly condemned the worship and use of
images. Those who, notwithstanding this decree of the council, raised
commotions in the state, were severely punished, and new laws were enacted to
set bounds to the violence of monastic rage. Leo IV. who was declared emperor in
775, pursued the same measures, and had recourse to the coercive influence of
penal laws, in order to extirpate idolatry out of the Christian church. Irene,
the wife of Leo, poisoned her husband in 780; assumed the reins of the empire
during the minority of her son Constantine; and in 786 summoned a council at
Nice, in Bithynia, known by the name of the Second Nicene Council, which
abrogated the laws and decrees against the new idolatry, restored the worship
of images and of the cross, and denounced severe punishments against those who
maintained that God was the only object of religious adoration. in this contest
the britons, Germans, and Gauls, were of opinion that images might be lawfully
continued in churches; but they considered the worship of them as highly
injurious and offensive to the Supreme Being. Charlemagne distinguished himself
as a mediator in this controversy: he ordered four books concerning images to
be composed, refuting the reasons urged by the Nicene bishops to justify the
worship of images, which he sent to Adrian, the Roman pontiff, in 790, in order
to engage him to withdraw his approbation of the decrees of the last council of
Nice. Adrian wrote and answer; and in 794 a council of 300 bishops, assembled
by Charlemagne, at Francfort, on the Maine, confirmed the opinion contained in
the four books, and solemnly condemned the worship of images.
In the Greek church, after the banishment of
Irene, the controversy concerning images broke out anew, and was carried on by
the contending parties, during the half of the ninth century, with various and
uncertain success. The emperor Nicephorus appears upon the whole to have been
an enemy to his idolatrous worship. His successor, Michael Curopalates,
surnamed Rhangabe, patronized and encouraged it. But the scene changed on the
accession of Leo, the Armenian, to the empire, who assembled a council at
Constantinople, in 812, that abolished the decrees of the Nicene council. His
successor, Michael, surnamed Balbus, disapproved of the worship of images, and
his son Theophilus, treated them with great severity. However, the empress
Theodora, after his death, and during the minority of her son, assembled a
council at Constantinople in 842, which reinstated the decrees of the second
Nicene council, and encouraged image worship by a law. The council held at the
same place under Protius, in 879, and reckoned by the Greeks the eighth general
council, confirmed and renewed the Nicene decrees. In commemoration of this
council, a festival was instituted by the superstitious Greeks, called the
Feast of Orthodoxy. The Latins were generally of opinion that images might be
suffered, as the means of aiding the memory of the faithful, and of calling to
their remembrance the pious exploits and virtuous actions of the persons whom
they represented; but they detested all thoughts of paying them the least marks
of religious homage or adoration. The council of Paris assembled in 824 by
Louis the Meek, resolved to allow the use of images in the churches, but
severely prohibited rendering them religious worship: nevertheless, towards the
conclusion of this century, the Gallican clergy began to pay a kind of
religious homage to the images of saints, and their example was followed by the
Germans and other nations. However, the Iconoclastes still had their adherents
among the Latins; the most eminent of whom was Claudius, bishop of Turin, who,
in 823, ordered all images, and even the crosses to be cast out of the
churches, and committed to the flames; and he wrote a treatise, in which he
declared both against the use and worship of them. He condemned relics,
pilgrimages to the Holy Land, and all voyages to the tombs of saints; and to
his writing and labours it was owing, that the city of Turin, and the adjacent
country, was, for a long time after his death, much less infected with
superstition than the other parts of Europe. The controversy concerning the
sanctity of images was again revived by Leo, bishop of Chalcedon: in the 11th
century, on occasion of the emperor Alexius's converting the figures of silver
that adorned the portals of the churches into money, in order to supply the
exigencies of the state. The bishop obstinately maintained that he had been
guilty of sacrilege; and published a treatise in which he affirmed, that in
these images there resided an inherent sanctity, and that the adoration of
Christians ought not to be confined to the persons represented by these images,
but extend to the images themselves. The emperor assembled a council at
Constantinople, which determined that the images of Christ and of the saints
were to be honoured only with a relative worship; and that the invocation and
worship were to be addressed to the saints only, as the servants of Christ, and
on account of their relation to him as their master. Leo, dissatisfied with
these absurd and superstitious decisions, was sent into banishment. In the
western church, the worship of images was disapproved, and opposed by several
considerable parties as the Petrobrussians, Albigenses, Waldenses, & c. till
at length this idolatrous practice was abolished in many parts of the Christian
world by the reformation. See IMAGE.
Or ICONOLATERS, those who worship images; a name which the Iconoclastes give to those of the Romish communion, on account of their adoring images, and of rendering to them the worship only due to God. The word is formed from image, and I worship. See last article, and article IMAGE.
A reluctancy to be employed in any kind of work. The idle man is in every view both foolish and criminal. "He neither lives to God, to the world, nor to himself. He does not live to God, for he answers not the end for which he was brought into being. Existence is a sacred trust; but he who misemploys and squanders it away, thus becomes treacherous to its Author. Those powers which should be employed in his service, and for the promotion of his glory, lie dormant. The time which should be sacred to Jehovah is lost; and thus he enjoys no fellowship with God, nor any way devotes himself to his praise. He lives not to the world, nor for the benefit of his fellow-creatures around him. While all creation is full of life and activity, and nothing stands still in the universe, he remains idle, forgetting that mankind are connected by various relations and mutual dependencies, and that the order of the world cannot be maintained without perpetual circulation of active duties. He lives not to himself. Though he imagines that he leaves to others the drudgery of life, and betakes himself to enjoyment and ease, yet, in fact, he has no true pleasure. While he is a blank in society, he is no less a torment to himself; for he who knows not what it is to labour, knows not what it is to enjoy. He shuts the door against improvement of every kind, whether of mind, body, or fortune. Sloth enfeebles equally the bodily and the mental powers. His character falls into contempt. Disorder, confusion, and embarrassment mark his whole situation. Idleness is the inlet to a variety of other vices. It undermines every virtue in the soul. Violent passions, like rapid torrents, run their course; but after having overflowed their banks, their impetuosity subsides: but sloth, especially when it is habitual, is like the slowly-flowing putrid stream, which stagnates in the marsh, breeds venomous animals and poisonous plants, and infects with pestilential vapours the whole country round it. Having once tainted the soul, it leaves no part of it sound; and at the same time gives not those alarms to conscience which the eruptions of bolder and fiercer emotions often occasion." Logan's Sermons, vol. i. ser. 4. Blair's Sermons, vol. iii. ser. 4. Idler, vol. i. p. 5, 171, 172. Cowper's Poems, 228, vol. i. duod. Johnson's Rambler, vol. ii. p. 162,163.
The worship of idols, or the act of ascribing to
things and persons, properties which are peculiar to God alone. The principal
sources of idolatry seem to be the extravagant veneration for creatures and
beings from which benefits accrue to men. Dr. Jortin says, that idolatry had
four privileges to boast of. The first was a venerable antiquity, more ancient
than the Jewish religion; and idolaters might have said to the Israelites,
Where was your religion before Moses and Abraham? Go, and enquire in Chaldes, and
there you will find that your fathers served other gods.--2. It was wider
spread than the Jewish religion. It was the religion of the greatest , the
wisest, and the politest nations of the Chaldeans, Egyptians, and Phoenicians,
the parents of civil government, and of arts and sciences.--3. It was more
adapted to the bent which men have towards visible and sensible objects. Men
want gods who shall go before them, and be among them. God, who is every where
in power, and no where in appearance, is hard to be conceived.--4. It favoured
human passions: it required no morality: its religious ritual consisted of
splendid ceremonies, revelling, dancing, nocturnal assemblies, impure and
scandalous mysteries, debaucined priests, and gods, who were both slaves and patrons
to all sorts of vices.
"All the more remarkable false religions
that have been or are in the world, recommend themselves by one or other of
these four privileges and characters."
The first objects of idolatrous worship are
thought to have been the sun, moon, and stars. Others think that angels were
first worshipped. Soon after the flood we find idolatry greatly prevailing in
the world. Abraham's father's family served other gods beyond the river
Euphrates; and Laban had idols which Rachel brought along with her. In process
of time, noted patriots, or kings deceased, animals of various kinds, plants,
stones, and, in fine, whatever people took a fancy to, they idolized. The
Egyptians, though high pretenders to wisdom, worshipped pied bulls, snipes,
leeks, onions, &c. The Greeks had about 30,000 gods. The Gomerians deified
their ancient kings, nor were the Chaldeans, Romans, Chinese, &c. a whit
less absurd. Some violated the most natural affections by murdering multitudes
of their neighbours and children, under pretence of sacrificing them to their
god. Some nations of Germany, Scandinavia, and Tartary, imagined that violent
death in war, or by self-murder, was the proper method of access to the future
enjoyment of their gods. In far later times, about 64,080 persons were
sacrificed at the dedication of one idolatrous temple in the space of four days
in America. The Hebrews never had any idols of their own, but they adopted
those of the nations around. The veneration which the Papists pay to the Virgin
Mary, and other saints and angels, and to the bread in the sacrament, the
cross, relics, and images, lays a foundation for the Protestants to charge them
with idolatry, though they deny the charge. It is evident that they worship
them, and that they justify the worship, but deny the idolatry of it, by
distinguishing subordinate from supreme worship: the one they call latria, the
other dulia: but this distinction is thought by many of the Protestant to be
vain, futile, and nugatory.
Idolatry has been divided into metaphorical and
proper. By metaphorical idolatry, is meant that inordinate love of riches,
honours, and bodily pleasures, whereby the passions and appetites of men are
made superior to the will of God; man, by so doing, making a god of himself and
his sensual temper. Proper idolatry is giving the divine honour to another. The
objects or idols of that honour which are given are either personal, i.e. the
idolatrous themselves, who become their own statues; or internal, as false
ideas, which are set up in the fancy instead of God, such as fancying God to be
a light, flame, matter, &c. only here, the scene being internal, the
scandal of the sin is thereby abated; or external, as worshipping angels, the
sun, stars, animals, &c. Tenison on Idolatry; A. Young on Idolatrous
Corruptions; Ridgley's Body of Div. qu. 106. Fell's Idolatry of Greece and
Rome; Stillingfleet's Idolatry of the Church of Rome; Jortin's Ser. vol. vi.
ser. 18.
The want of knowledge or instruction. It is often used to denote illiteracy. Mr. Locke observes, that the causes of ignorance are chiefly three.--1. Want of ideas.--2. Want of a discoverable connection between the ideas we have.--3. Want of tracing and examining our ideas. As it respects religion, ignorance has been distinguished into three sorts: 1. An invincible ignorance, in which the will has no part. It is an insult upon justice to suppose it will punish men because they were ignorant of things which they were physically incapable of knowing.--2. There is a wilful and obstinate ignorance; such as ignorance, far from exculpating, aggravates a man's crimes.--3. A sort of ignorance which is neither entirely wilful, nor entirely invincible; as when a man has the means of knowledge, and does not use them. See KNOWLEDGE; and Locke on the Und. vol. ii. p. 178; Grove's Mor. Phil. vol. ii. p. 26, 29, 64; Watts on the Mind.
A term anciently applied to such as had received baptism. The name was occasioned by a ceremony in the baptism of adults, which consisted in putting a lighted taper in the hand of the person baptized, as a symbol of the faith and grace he had received in the sacrament.
Was also the name of a sect which appeared in
Spain about the year 1575. They were charged with maintaining that mental
prayer and contemplation had so intimately united them to God, that they were
arrived to such a state of perfection, as to stand in no need of good works, or
the sacraments of the church, and that they might commit the grossest crimes
without sin.
After the suppression of the Illuminati in Spain,
there appeared a denomination in France which took the same name. They
maintained that one Anthony Buckuet had a system of belief and practice
revealed to him which exceeded every thing Christianity had yet been acquainted
with: that by this method persons might in a short time arrive at the same
degrees of perfection and glory to which the saints and the Blessed Virgin have
attained; and this improvement might be carried on till our actions became
divine, and our minds wholly given up to the influence of the Almighty. They
said further, that none of the doctors of the church knew any thing of
religion; that Paul and Peter were well-meaning men, but knew nothing of
devotion; that the whole church lay in darkness and unbelief; that every one
was at liberty to follow the suggestions of his conscience; that God regarded
nothing but himself; and that within ten years their doctrine would be received
all over the world; then there would be no more occasion for priests, monks,
and such other religious distinctions.
A name assumed by a secret society, founded on the first of May, 1776, by Dr. Adam Weishaupt, professor of canon law in the university of Ingoldstadt. The avowed object of this order was, "to diffuse from secret societies, as from so many centres, the light of science over the world; to propagate the purest principles of virtue; and to reinstate mankind in the happiness which they enjoyed during the golden age fabled by the poets." Such a philanthropic object was doubtless well adapted to make a deep impression on the minds of ingenious young men; and to such alone did Dr. Weishaupt at first address himself. But "the real object," we are assured by Professor Robison and Abbe Barruel, "was, by clandestine arts, to overturn every government and every religion; to bring the sciences of civil life into contempt; and to reduce mankind to that imaginary state of nature, when they lived independent of each other on the spontaneous productions of the earth." Free Masonry being the high reputation all over Europe when Weishaupt first formed the plan of his society, he availed himself of its secrecy to introduce his new order; of which he constituted himself general, after initiating some of his pupils, whom he styled Areopagites, in its mysteries. And when report spread the news throughout Germany of the institution of the Order of Illuminees, it was generally considered as a mere college lodge, which could interest the students no longer than during the period of their studies. Weishaupt's character, too, which at this time was respectable for morality as well as erudition, prevented all suspicion of his harbouring any such dark designs as have since come to light. But it would far exceed the limits to which this work is restricted, to give even an outline of the nature and constitution of this extraordinary society; of its secrets and mysteries; of the deep dissimulation, consummate hypocrisy, and shocking impiety of its founder and his associates; of their Jesuitical art in concealing their real objects, and their incredible industry and astonishing exertions in making converts; of the absolute despotism and complete system of espionnage established throughout the order; of its different degrees of Novices, Minervals, Minor and Major Illuminees; Epopts, or Priests, Regents, Magi, and Mankings; of the Recruiters or Insinuators, with their various subtle methods of insinuating into all characters and companies; of the blind obedience exacted of the Novices, and the absolute power of life and death assumed by the order, and conceded by the Novices; of the dictionary, geography, kalendar, and cipher of the order; of the new names assumed by the members, such as Spartacus by Weishaupt, because he pretended to wage war against oppressors; Cato by Zwack; Ajax by Massenhausen, &c. of the Minerval Academy and Library; of the questions proposed to the candidates for degrees, and the various ceremonies of admission to each; and of the pretended morality, real blasphemies, and absolute atheism, of the founder and his tried friends. Such of our readers as wish to be fully informed of these matters, we must refer to the Abbe Barruel's works, and to Prof. Robison's Proofs of a Conspiracy against all the Religions and Governments of Europe. But while credit may be given to the general facts related in these works, some doubts respecting the ultimate objects of Dr. Weishaupt and his associates in this conspiracy may be expressed: as, That men of their principles should secretly conspire to overthrow all the religions and governments at present in Europe, is by no means incredible; that they should even prevail on many well-meaning philanthropists, who are no enemies to rational religion or good government, to join them, is also very credible. But that a set of men of learning and abilities, such as Weishaupt and his associates are allowed to be, should form a conspiracy to overturn, and with more than Gothic rage utterly abolish the arts and sciences, and to restore the supposed original savage state of man, appears to us a phenomenon in the history of the human heart totally unaccountable. That "the heart of man is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked," is a melancholy truth, which not Scripture alone, but the history of mankind in all ages and nations, affords full proof of, as well as the shocking history of the Illuminati; but while pride and vanity have a place in the human heart, to say nothing of our other passions, which are more or less interested in the preservation of the discoveries and improvements in arts, sciences, and their inseparable concomitant luxury, we are persuaded no man, or body of men, who have enjoyed the sweets of civilized life, ever formed a serious wish for the total abolition of the arts and sciences. In the fury and rage of war, Goths, Vandals, and Turks, may burn and destroy monuments of art and repositories of science; but when the wars are over, instead of returning to the savage state, the barbarous conquerors miss and amalgamate with the conquered, and become themselves more or less civilized. Dr. Weishaupt is allowed to be influenced by a high degree of vanity; as an evidence of which he communicates as the last secret to his most favoured adepts, that the mysteries of Illuminism, which, in going through the inferior degrees, had been successively attributed to the most ancient patriarchs and philosophers, and even to Christ himself, owed its origin to no other than Adam Weishaupt, known in the order by the name of Spartacus. the same vanity which leads the doctor to take this traditional method, while secrecy is deemed necessary, of securing to himself the honour of having founded the society, would lead him, were the Illuminati actually victorious over all religions and governments, to wish to have his memory recorded in a more durable manner by writing or printing. But if these and all the other arts were to perish in a mass, then the memory of the doctor, and the important services he had done to the order and to savagism, must, within a century at the utmost, perish along with them. But if, in fact, the total annihilation of the arts and sciences, as well as of all religion and government, be really the object of Weishaupt and his Illuminees, then we may agree with the celebrated Mandeville, that "human nature is the true Libyan desert, daily producing new monsters," and that of these monsters the doctor and his associates are beyond a doubt the most extraordinary. Professor Robison informs us, that "the order of the Illuminati was abolished in 1786 by the elector of Bavaria, but revived immediately after, under another name, and in a different form, all over Germany. It was again detected and seemingly broken up; but it had by this time taken so deep root, that it still subsists without being detected, and has spread, we are told, into all the countries of Europe.
In a religious sense, is an artificial representation of some person or thing used as an object of adoration; in which sense it is used synonymously with idol. The use and adoration of images have been long controverted. It is plain, from the practice of the primitive church, recorded by the earlier fathers, that Christians, during the first three centuries, and the greater part of the fourth, neither worshipped images, nor used them in their worship. However, the generality of the popish divines maintain that the use and worship of images are as ancient as the Christian religion itself: to prove this, they allege a decree, said to have been made in a council held by the apostles at Antioch, commanding the faithful, that they may not err about the object of their worship, to make images of Christ, and worship them. Baron. ad. ann. 102. But no notice is taken of this decree till seven hundred years after the apostolic times, after the dispute about images had commenced. The first instance that occurs, in any credible author, of images among Christians, is that recorded by Tertullian de Pudicit. c. 10, of certain cups or chalices, as Beliarmine pretends, on which was represented the parable of the good shepherd carrying the lost sheep on his shoulders: but this instance only proves that the church, at that time, did not think emblematical figures unlawful ornaments of chalices. Another instance is taken from Eusebius (Hist. Eccl. lib. vii. cap. 18,) who says, that in his time there were to be seen two brass statues in the city of Paneas, or Caesarea Philippi; the one of a woman on her knees, with her arm stretched out; the other of a man over against her, with his hand extended to receive her; these statues were said to be the images of our Saviour, and the woman whom he cured of an issue of blood. From the foot of the statue representing our Saviour, says the historian, sprung up an exotic plant, which as soon as it grew to touch the border of his garment, was said to cure all sorts of distempers. Eusebius, however, vouches none of these things; nay, he supposes that the woman who erected this statue of our Saviour was a pagan, and ascribes it to a pagan custom. Philostorgius (Eccl. Hist. lib. vii. c. 3.) expressly says that this statue was carefully preserved by the Christians, but that they paid no kind of worship to it, because it is not lawful for Christians to worship brass, or any other matter. The primitive Christians abstained from the worship of images, not, as the Papists pretend, from tenderness to heathen, idolaters, but because they thought it unlawful in itself to make any images of the Deity. Tertullian, Clemens Alexandrinus, and Origen, were of opinion, that, by the second commandment, painting and engraving were unlawful to a Christian, styling them evil and wicked arts. Tert. de Idol. cap. 3. Clem Alex. Admon. ad Gent. p. 41. Origen contra Celsum, lib. vi. p. 182. the use of images in churches, as ornaments, was first introduced by some Christians in Spain, in the beginning of the fourth century; but the practice was condemned as a dangerous innovation, in a council held at Eliberis, in 305. Epephanius, in a letter preserved by Jerome, tom. ii. ep. 6, bears strong testimony against images; and he may be considered as one of the first iconoclasts. The custom of admitting pictures of saints and martyrs into churches (for this was the first source of image worship) was rare in the end of the fourth century, but became common in the fifth. But they were still considered only as ornaments, and, even in this view, they met with very considerable opposition. In the following century, the custom of thus adorning churches became almost universal, both in the East and West. Petavius expressly says (de Incar. lib. xv. cap. 14.) that no statues were yet allowed in the churches, because they bore too near a resemblance to the idols of the Gentiles. Towards the close of the fourth, or beginning of the fifth century, images, which were introduced by way of ornament, and then used as an aid to devotion began to be actually worshipped. However, it continued to be the doctrine of the church in the sixth, and in the beginning of the seventh century, that images were to be used only as helps to devotion, and not as objects of worship. The worship of them was condemned in the strongest terms by Gregory the Great, as appears by two of his letters written in 601. From this time to the beginning of the eighth century, there occurs no instance of any worship given, or allowed to be given to images, by any council or assembly of bishops whatever. But they were commonly worshipped by the monks and populace in the beginning of the eighth century; insomuch, that in 726, when Leo published his famous edict, it had already spread into all the provinces subject to the empire. The Lutherans condemn the Calvinists for breaking the images in the churches of the Catholics, looking on it as a kind of sacrilege; and yet they condemn the Romanists (who are professed image-worshippers) as idolaters: nor can these last keep pace with the Greeks, who go far beyond them in this point, which has occasioned abundance of disputes among them. See ICONOCLASTES. The Jews absolutely condemn all images, and do not so much as suffer any statues or figures in their houses, much less in their synagogues, or places of worship. The Mahometans have an equal aversion to images; which led them to destroy most of the beautiful monuments of antiquity, both sacred and profane, at Constantinople--Bingham's Orig. Eccl. b. viii. c. 8. Middleton's Letters from Rome, p. 21. Burnet on the Art. p. 209, 219. Doddridge's Lect. lec. 193. Tennison on Idolatry, p. 269, 275. Ridgely's Body of Div. qu. 110.
In the soul, is distinguished into natural and moral. By natural is meant the understanding, reason, will, and other intellectual faculties. By the moral image, the right use of those faculties, or what we term holiness.
Is a power or faculty of the mind, whereby it conceives and forms ideas of things communicated to it by the outward organs of sense; or it is the power of recollecting, and assembling images, and of painting forcibly those images on our minds, or on the minds of others. The cause of the pleasures of the imagination in whatever is great, uncommon, or beautiful, is this; that God has annexed a secret pleasure to the idea of any thing that is new or rare, that he might encourage and stimulate us in the eager and keen pursuits after knowledge, and inflame our best passions to search into the wonders of creation and revelation; for every new idea brings such a pleasure along with it, as rewards any pains we have taken in its acquisition, and consequently serves as a striking and powerful motive to put us upon fresh discoveries in learning and science, as well as in the word and works of God. See Rev. W. Jones's Works, vol. vi. ser. 17; Ryland's Contemplations, vol. i. p. 64; Akenside's Pleasures of Imagination; Addison's beautiful papers on the Imagination, vol. vi.; Spect. p. 64, &c.; Grove's Mor. Phil. p. 354,355,410, vol. i.
The belief that the soul is a spiritual substance distinct from the body. See MATERIALISM and SOUL.
Unbounded or incomprehensible greatness; and unlimited extension, which no finite and determinate space, repeated ever so often, can equal. See INFINITY OF GOD.
An action inconsistent with our duty towards men, and consequently a sin against God, who hath commanded us to do justly, and love mercy. See MORALITY.
A state which has no end; the impossibility of dying. It is applied to God, who is absolutely immortal, 1 Tim. i. 17. and to the human soul, which is only hypothetically immortal; as God, who at first gave it, can, if he pleases, deprive us of our existence. See SOUL.
In his unchangeableness. He is immutable in his essence, James i. 17. In his attributes, Ps. cii. 27. In his purposes, Isa. xxv. 1. Ps. xxxiii. 11. In his promises, Mal. iii. 6. 2 Tim. ii. 12. And in his threatenings, Matt. xxv. 41. "This is a perfection," says Dr. Blair, "which, perhaps, more than any other, distinguishes the divine nature from the human, gives complete energy to all its attributes, and entitles it to the highest adoration. From hence are derived the regular order of nature, and the steadfastness of the universe. Hence flows the unchanging terror of those laws which from age to age regulate the conduct of mankind. Hence the uniformity of that government, and the certainty of those promises, which are the ground of our trust and security. An objection, however, may be raised against this doctrine, from the commands given us to prayer, and other religious exercises. to what purpose, it may be urged, is homage addressed to a Being whose plan is unalterably fixed? This objection would have weight, if our religious addresses were designed to work any alteration in God, either by giving him information of what he did not know, or by exciting affections which he did not possess; or by inducing him to change measures which he had previously formed: but they are only crude and imperfect notions of religion which can suggest such ideas. The change which our devotions are intended to make, are upon ourselves, not upon the Almighty. By pouring out our sentiments and desires before God, by adoring his perfections, and confessing our unworthiness; by expressing our dependence on his aid; our gratitude for his past favours, our submission to his present will, and our trust in his future mercy, we cultivate such affections as suit our place and station in the universe, and are to be exercised by us as men and as Christians. The contemplation of this divine perfection should raise in our minds admiration; should teach us to imitate, as far as our frailty will permit, that constancy and steadfastness which we adore, 2 Cor. iii. 18; and, lastly, should excite trust and confidence in the Divine Being, amidst all the revolutions of this uncertain world." Blair's Sermons, ser. 4. vol. ii.; Charnock's works, vol. i. p. 203; Gill's Body of Div. vol. i. p. 50; Lambert's Sermons, ser. on Mal. iii. 6.
a term used by divines to signify the opinion of the Lutherans with regard to the eucharist, who believe that the species of bread and wine remain together with the body of our Saviour after consecration.
A name given to those heretics who boasted that they were impecable, and that there was no need of repentance; such were the Gnostics, Priscillianists, &c.
The state of a person who cannot sin; or a grace, privilege, or principle, which puts him out of a possibility of sinning. Divines have distinguished several kinds of impeccability: that of God belongs to him by nature: that of Jesus Christ, considered as man, belongs to him by the hypostatical union; that of the blessed, in consequence of their condition, &c.
Is that by which we take up any system or opinion of another without examination. This has been one of the chief sources of ignorance and error in the church of Rome. The divines of that community teach, "That we are to observe, not how the church proves any thing, but what she says: that the will of God is, that we should believe and confide in his ministers in the same manner as himself." Cardinal Toletus, in his instructions for priests, asserts, "That if a rustic believes his bishop proposing an heretical tenet for an article of faith, such belief is meritorious." Cardinal Cusanus tells us, "That irrational obedience is the most consummate and perfect obedience, when we obey without attending to reason, as a beast obeys his driver." In an epistle to the Bohemians he has these words: "I assert, that there are no precepts of Christ but those which are received as such by the church (meaning the church of Rome.) When the church changes her judgment, God changes his judgment likewise." What madness! what blasphemy! For a church to demand belief of what she teaches, and a submission to what she enjoins, merely upon her assumed authority, must appear to unprejudiced minds the height of unreasonableness and spiritual despotism. We could wish this doctrine had been confined to this church; but, alas! it has been too prevalent in other communities. A theological system, says Dr. Jortin, is too often no more than a temple consecrated to implicit faith; and he who enters in there to worship, instead of leaving his shoes, after the eastern manner, must leave his understanding at the door; and it will be well if he find it when he comes out again.
An ecclesiastical action, by which a bishop lays his hands on the head of a person in ordination, confirmation, or in uttering a blessing. This practice is also frequently observed by the Dissenters at the ordination of their preachers; when the ministers present place their hands on the head of him whom they are ordaining, while one of them prays for a blessing on him and on his future labours. they are not agreed, however, as to the propriety of this ceremony. Some suppose it to be confined to those who received extraordinary gifts in the primitive times: others think it ought to be retained, as it was an ancient practice used where no extraordinary gifts were conveyed, Gen. xlviii. 14. Matt. xix. 15. They do not suppose it to be of such an important and essential nature, that the validity and usefulness of a man's future ministry depend upon it in any degree. Imposition of hands was a Jewish ceremony, introduced not by any divine authority, but by custom; it being the practice among those people, whenever they prayed to God for any person, to lay their hands on his head. Our Saviour observed the same custom, both when he conferred his blessing on children, and when he healed the sick, adding prayer to the ceremony. the apostles, likewise, laid hands on those upon whom they bestowed the Holy Ghost. The priests observed the same custom when any one was received in their body. And the apostles themselves underwent the imposition of hands afresh every time they entered upon any new design. In the ancient church, imposition of hands was even practised on persons when they married, which custom the Abyssinians still observe. Maurice's Dial. on Soc. Religion, p. 163, 168. Watt's Rational Foundation of a Christian Ch. p. 31; Turner on Church Gov. p. 70; King's Primitive Christ. Ch. p. 49.
Are such as pretend to an extraordinary commission from heaven, and who terrify the people with false denunciations of judgments. Too many of these have abounded in almost all ages. They are punishable in the temporal courts with fine, imprisonment, and corporeal punishment. See FALSE MESSIAHS.
or IMPOTENCE, is considered as natural and moral. Natural is the want of some physical principle necessary to an action, or where a being is absolutely defective, or not free and at liberty to act. Moral impotency imports a great difficulty; as a strong habit to the contrary; a violent passion; or the like.
A parsonage or ecclesiastical living, the profits of which are in the hands of a layman; in which case its stands distinguished from appropriation, which is where the profits of a benefice are in the hands of a bishop college, &c. though the terms are now used promiscuously.
An influence, idea, or motive acting upon the mind. We must be careful how we are guided by impulses in religion. "There are many," as one observes, "who frequently feel singular impressions upon their minds, and are inclined to pay a very strict regard unto them. Yea, some carry this point so far, as to make it almost the only rule of their judgment, and will not determine any thing, until they find it in their hearts to do it, as their phrase is. Others take it for granted, that the divine mind is notified to them by sweet or powerful impressions of some passages of sacred writ. There are others who are determined by visionary manifestations, or by the impressions made in dreams, and the interpretations they put upon them. All these things being of the same general nature, may very justly be considered together; and it is a matter of doubt with many how far these things are to be regarded, or attended to by us; and how we may distinguish any divine impressions of this kind from the delusions of the tempter, or of our own evil hearts. But, whoever makes any of these things his rule and standard, he forsakes the divine word; and nothing tends more to make persons unhappy in themselves, unsteady in their conduct, or more dangerously deluded in their practice, than paying a random regard to these impulses, as notifications of the divine will." See ENTHUSIASM, PROVIDENCE.
Want of that regard to decency, chastity, or
holiness, which our duty requires. Impurity, in the law of Moses, is any legal
defilement. Of these there were several sorts: some were voluntary, as the
touching a dead body, or any animal that died of itself; or any creature that
was esteemed unclean; or touching things holy by one who was not clean, or was
not a priest; the touching one who had a leprosy, one who had a gonorrhoea, or
who was polluted by a dead carcase, &c. Sometimes these impurities were
involuntary; as when any one inadvertently touched bones, or a sepulchre, or
any thing polluted: or fell into such diseases as pollute, as the leprosy,
&c.
The beds, clothes, and moveables which had
touched any thing unclean, contracted also a kind of impurity, and in some
cases communicated it to others.
These legal pollutions were generally removed by
bathing, and lasted no longer than the evening. The person polluted plunged
over head in the water,; and either had his clothes on when he did so, or
washed himself and his clothes separately. Other pollutions continued seven
days; as, that which was contracted by touching a dead body. Some impurities
lasted forty or fifty days; as, that of women who were lately delivered, who
were unclean forty days after the birth of a boy, and fifty after the birth of
a girl. Others, again, lasted till the person was cured.
Many of these pollutions were expiated by
sacrifices, and others by a certain water or lye made with the ashes of a red
heifer, sacrificed on the great day of expiation. When the leper was cured, he
went to the temple, and offered a sacrifice of two birds, one of which was
killed, and the other set at liberty. He who had touched a dead body, or had
been present at a funeral, was to be purified with the water of expiation, and
this upon pain of death. The woman who had been delivered, offered a turtle and
a lamb for her expiation; or if she was poor, two turtles, or two young
pigeons.
These impurities, which the law of Moses has
expressed with the greatest accuracy and care, were only figures of other more
important impurities, such as the sins and iniquities committed against God, or
faults committed against our neighbour. The saints and prophets of the Old
Testament were sensible of this; and our Saviour, in the Gospel, has strongly
inculcated,--that they are not outward and corporeal pollutions which render us
unacceptable to God, but such inward pollutions as infect the soul, and are
violations of justice, truth, and charity.
Is the attributing any matter, quality, or character, whether good or evil, to any person as his own. It may refer to what was originally his, antecedently to such imputation; or to what was not antecedently his, but becomes so by virtue of such imputation only, 2 Sam. xix. 19. Ps. cvi. 31. The imputation that respects our justification before God is of the latter kind, and may be defined thus: it is God's gracious donation of the righteousness of Christ to believers, and his acceptance of their persons as righteous on the account thereof. Their sins being imputed to him, and his obedience being imputed to them, they are, in virtue hereof, both acquitted from guilt, and accepted as righteous before God, Rom. iv. 6,7. Rom. v. 18,19. 2 Cor. v. 21. See RIGHTEOUSNESS, SIN; Dickinson's Letters, p. 156; Hervey's Theronand Aspasia, vol. ii. p. 43; Doddridge's Works, vol. iv. p. 562; Watts's Works, vol. iii. p. 532.
Want of power sufficient for the performance of any particular action or design. It has been divided into natural and moral. We are said to be naturally unable to do a thing when we cannot do it if we wish, because of some impeding defect or obstacle that is extrinsic to the will, either in the understanding, constitution of the body, or external objects. Moral inability consists not in any of these things, but either in the want of inclination, or the strength of a contrary inclination; or the want of sufficient motives in view to induce and excite the act of the will, or the strength of apparent motives to the contrary. For the sake of illustration, we will here present the reader with a few examples of both.
Natural Moral
Cain could not have killed Cain could not have killed
Abel, if Cain had been the Abel, if Cain had feared God,
weakest, and Abel aware of and loved his brother.
him.
Jacob could not rejoice Potiphar's wife could not
in Joseph's exaltation rejoice in it. If she continued
before he heard of it. under it.
The woman mentioned in 2d Had that woman been a very
Kings vi. 29, could not kill affectionate mother, she could
her neighbour's son, and eat not have killed her own son in
him, when he was hid, and a time of plenty, as she did in
she could not find him. a time of famine.
Hazael could not have If a dutiful, affectionate son
smothered Benhadad, if had been waiting on Benhadad in
he had not been suffered Hazael's stead, he could not
to enter his chamber. have smothered him as Hazael did.
These are a few instances from which we may clearly learn the distinction of natural and moral inability. It must not, however, be forgotten, that moral inability or disinclination is no excuse for our omission of duty, though want of natural faculties or necessary means would. That God may command, though man has not a present moral ability to perform, is evident, if we consider, 1. That man once had a power to do whatsoever God would command him, he had a power to cleave to God.--2. That God did not deprive man of his ability.--3. Therefore God right of commanding, and man's obligation of returning and cleaving to God, remains firm. See LIBERTY; and Theol. Misc. vol. ii. p. 488; Edwards on the Will; Charnock's Works, vol. ii. p. 187; Watts on Liberty, p. 4.
The act whereby the Son of God assumed the human nature; or the mystery by which Jesus Christ, the Eternal Word, was made man, in order to accomplish the work of our salvation. See NATIVITY, and Meldrum on the Incarnation.
The crime of criminal and unnatural commerce
with a person within the degrees forbidden by the law. By the rules of the
church, incest was formerly very absurdly extended even to the seventh degree;
but it is now restricted to the third or fourth. Most nations look on incest
with horror, Persia and Egypt excepted. In the history of the ancient kings of
those countries we meet with instances of brothers marrying their own sisters,
because they thought it too mean to join in alliance with their own subjects,
and still more so to marry into any foreign family. Vortigern, king of South
Britain, equalled, or rather excelled them in wickedness, by marrying his own
daughter. The queen of Portugal was married to her uncle; and the prince of
Brazil, the son of that incestuous marriage, is wedded to his aunt. But they
had dispensations for these unnatural marriages from his holiness. "In
order," says one, "to preserve chastity in families, and between
persons of different sexes brought up and living together in a state of
unreserved intimacy, it is necessary, by every method possible, to inculcate an
abhorrence of incestuous conjunctions; which abhorrence can only be upheld by
the absolute reprobation of all commerce of the sexes between near relations.
Upon this principle the marriage, as well as other cohabitation of brothers and
sisters of lineal kindred, and of all who usually live in the same family, may
be said to be forbidden by the law of nature. Restrictions which extend to
remoter degrees of kindred than what this reason makes it necessary to prohibit
from intermarriage, are founded in the authority of the positive law which
ordains them, and can only be justified by their tendency to diffuse wealth, to
connect families, or to promote some political advantage.
"The Levitical law, which is received in
this country, and from which the rule of the Roman law differs very little,
prohibits marriage between relations within three degrees of kindred; computing
the generations not from but through the common ancestor, and accounting
affinity the same as consanguinity. the issue, however, of such marriages are
not bastardized, unless the parents be divorced during their lifetime."
Paley's Mor. Phil. p. 316, vol. 1.
An ideal crime, committed between two persons who have a spiritual alliance, by means of baptism or confirmation. This ridiculous fancy was made use of as an instrument of great tyranny in times when the power of the pope was unlimited, even queens being sometimes divorced upon this pretence. Incest Spiritual is also understood of a vicar, or other beneficiary, who enjoys both the mother and the daughter; that is, holds two benefices, one whereof depends upon the collation of the other. Such spiritual incest renders both the one and the other of these benefices vacant.
Is the disposition or propensity of the mind to any particular object or action: or a kind of bias upon nature, by the force of which it is carried towards certain actions previously to the exercise of thought and reasoning about the nature and consequences of them. Inclinations are of two kinds, natural or acquired. 1. Natural are such as we often see in children, who from their earliest years differ in their tempers and dispositions. In one you see the dawnings of a liberal diffusive soul; another gives us cause to fear he will be altogether as narrow and sordid. Of one we may say he is naturally revengeful; of another, that he is patient and forgiving.--2. Acquired inclinations are such as are superinduced by custom, which are called habits; and these are either good or evil. See HABIT.
This is a relative term, and indicates a relation between an object and a faculty; between God and a created understanding; so that the meaning of it is this, that no created understanding can comprehend God; that is, have a perfect and exact knowledge of him, such a knowledge as is adequate to the perfection of the object, Job xi. 7. Is. xl. God is incomprehensible, 1. As to the nature of his essence. 2. the excellency of his attributes. 3. The depth of his counsels. 4. The works of his providence. 5. the dispensation of his grace, Eph. iii. 8. Job xxxvii. 25. Rom. xi. The incomprehensibility of God follows, 1. From his being a spirit endured with perfections greatly superior to our own.--2. There may be (for any thing we certainly know) attributes and perfections in God of which we have not the least idea.--3. In those perfections of the divine nature of which we have some idea, there are many things to us inexplicable, and with which, the more deeply and attentively we think of them, the more we find our thoughts swallowed up: such as his self-existence, eternity, omnipresence, &c. This should teach us therefore, 1. To admire and reverence the Divine Being, Zech. ix. 17. Neh. ix. 5.--2. To be humble and modest, Ps. viii. 1,4. Eccl. v. 2,3. Job xxxvii. 19.--3. To be serious in our addresses, and sincere in our behaviour towards him. Caryl on Job xxvii. 25; Tillotson's sermons, sermon 156; Abernethy's Sermons, vol. ii. No. 6,7; Doddridge's Lect. lec. 59.
Not abstaining from unlawful desires. See CONTINENCY.
Is his being without a body. That God is incorporeal is evident; for, 1. Materiality is incompatible with self-existence, and God being self-existent, must be incorporeal.--2. If God were corporeal, he could not be present in any part of the world where body is; yet his presence is necessary for the support and, motion of body.--3. A body cannot be in two places at the same time; yet he is every where, and fills heaven and earth.--4. A body is to be seen and felt, but God is invisible and impalpable, John i. 18. Charnock's works, vol. i. p. 117; Doddridge's Lect. lec. 47; Gill's Body of Div. vol. i. p. 45. oct.
Or INCORRUPTIBILES, the name of a sect which sprang out of the Eutychians. Their distinguishing tenet was, that the body of Jesus Christ was incorruptible; by which they meant, that, after and from the time wherein he was formed in the womb of his mother, he was not susceptible of any change or alteration; not even of any natural or innocent passion, as of hunger, thirst, &c. so that he ate without occasion before his death, as well as after his resurrection.
The withholding our assent to any proposition, notwithstanding arguments sufficient to demand assent. See Duncan Forbes's piece, entitled, Reflections on the Sources of Incredulity with regard to Religion, and Casaubon on Credulity and Incredulity.
Is his existence in and of himself, without depending on any other. "His being and perfections," as Dr. Ridgley observes, (Body of Div. q. 7.) "are underived, and not communicated to him, as all finite perfections are by him to the creature. This attribute of independency belongs to all his perfections. 1. He is independent as to his knowledge. He doth not receive ideas from any object out of himself, as intelligent creatures do. This is elegantly described by the prophet, Is. xl. 13,14.--2. He is independent in power. As he receives strength from no one, so he doth not act dependently on the will of the creature, Job xxxvi. 23.--3. He is independent as to his holiness, hating sin necessarily, and not barely depending on some reasons out of himself inducing him thereto; for it is essential to the divine nature to be infinitely opposite to sin, and therefore to be independently holy.--4. He is independent as to his bounty and goodness. He communicates blessings not by constraint, but according to his sovereign will. Thus he gave being to the world, and all things therein, which was the first instance of bounty and goodness; and this not by constraint, but by his free will; 'for his pleasure they are and were created.' In like manner, whatever instances of mercy he extends to miserable creatures, he acts independently, and not by force. He shows mercy, because it is his pleasure to do so, Rom. ix. 18. That God is independent, let it farther be considered, 1. That all things depend on his power which brought them into and preserves them in being. If, therefore, all things depend on God, then it would be absurdity to say that God depends on any thing, for this would be to suppose the cause and the effect to be mutually dependent on and derived from each other, which infers a contradiction.--2. If God be infinitely above the highest creatures, he cannot depend on any of them, for dependence argues inferiority, Is. xl. 15,17.--3. If God depend on any creature, he does not exist necessarily; and if so, then he might not have been: for the same will by which he is supposed to exist, might have determined that he should not have existed, which is altogether inconsistent with the idea of a God. From God's being independent, we infer, 1. That we ought to conclude that the creature cannot lay any obligation on him, or do any thing that may tend to make him more happy than he is in himself, Rom. xi. 35. Job xxii. 2,3.--2. If independency be a divine perfection, then let it not in any instance, or by any consequence, be attributed to the creature; let us conclude that all our springs are in him: and that all we enjoy and hope for is from him, who is the author and finisher of our faith, and the fountain of all our blessings."
A sect of Protestants, so called from their
maintaining that each congregation of Christians which meet in one house for
public worship is a complete church; has sufficient power to act and perform
every thing relating to religious government within itself; and is in no
respect subject or accountable to other churches.
Though the Episcopalians contend that there is
not a shadow of the independent discipline to be found either in the Bible or
the primitive church, the Independents, on the contrary, believe that it is
most clearly to be deduced from the practice of the apostles in planting the
first churches. See CHURCH CONGREGATIONAL, and EPISCOPACY. The Independents,
however, were not distinguished as a body till the time of queen Elizabeth. The
hierarchy established by that princess in the churches of her dominions, the
vestments worn by the clergy in the celebration of divine worship, the book of
Common Prayer, and, above all, the sign of the cross used in the administration
of baptism, were very offensive to many of her subjects, who, during the
persecutions of the former reign, had taken refuge among the Protestants of
Germany and Geneva. These men thought that the church of England resembled in
too many particulars the anti-christian church of Rome: they therefore called
perpetually for a more thorough reformation, and a purer worship. From this
circumstance they were stigmatized with the general name of Puritans, as the
followers of Novatian had been in the ancient church. See NOVATIANS. Elizabeth was
not disposed to comply with their demands; and it is difficult to say what
might have been the issue of the contest, had the Puritans been united among
themselves, in sentiments, views, and measures. But the case was quite
otherwise; that large body, composed of persons of different ranks, characters,
opinions, and intentions, and unanimous in nothing but their anitpathy to the
established church, was all of a sudden divided into a variety of sects. Of
these, the most famous was that which was formed about the year 1581, by Robert
Brown, a man insinuating in his manners, but unsteady and inconsistent in his
views and notions of men and things. Brown was for dividing the whole body of
the faithful into separate societies or congregations; and maintained that such
a number of persons as could be contained in an ordinary place of worship ought
to be considered as a church, and enjoy all the rights and privileges that are
competent to an ecclesiastical community. These small societies he pronounced
independent, jure divino, and entirely exempt from the jurisdiction of the
bishop, in whose hand the court had placed the reins of a spiritual government;
and also from that of presbyters and synods, which the Puritans regarded as the
supreme visible sources of ecclesiastical authority. But as we have given an
account of the general opinions and discipline of the Brownists, we need not
enumerate them here, but must beg the reader to refer to that article. The zeal
with which Brown and his associates maintained and propagated his notions, was,
in a high degree, intemperate and extravagant. He affirmed that all communion
was to be broken off with those religious societies that were founded upon a
different plan from his; and treated more especially the church of England as a
spurious church, whose ministers were unlawfully ordained; whose discipline was
popish and anti-christian; and whose sacraments and institutions were destitute
of all efficacy and virtue. His followers not being able to endure the severe
treatment which they met with from an administration that was not distinguished
for its mildness and indulgence, retired into the Netherlands, and founded
churches at Middlebourg, Amsterdam, and Leyden. Their founder, however,
returned into England, renounced his principles of separation, and took orders
in the established church. The Puritan exiles, whom he thus abandoned,
disagreed among themselves, were split into parties, and their affairs declined
from day to day. This engaged the wiser part of them to mitigate the severity
of their founder's plan, and to soften the rigour of his uncharitable
decisions.
The person who had the chief merit of bringing
about this reformation was one of their pastors, of the name of Robinson; a man
who had much of the solemn piety of the times, and no inconsiderable portion of
learning. this well-meaning reformer, perceiving the defects that reigned in
the discipline of Brown, and in the spirit and temper of his followers,
employed his zeal and diligence in correcting them, and in new-modelling the
society in such a manner, as to render it less odious to his adversaries, and
less liable to the just censure of those true Christians who look upon charity
as the end of the commandments. Hitherto the sect had been called Brownists; but
Robinson having in his apology affirmed that all Christian congregations were
so many independent religious societies, that had a right to be governed by
their own laws, independent of any farther or foreign jurisdiction, the sect
was henceforth called Independents, of which the apologist was considered as
the founder.
The first Independent or Congregational church in
England was established by a Mr. Jacob, in the year 1616. Mr. Jacob, who had
fled from the persecution of bishop Bancroft, going to Holland, and having
imparted his design of getting up a separate congregation, like those in
Holland, to the most learned Puritans of those times, it was not condemned as
unlawful, considering there was no prospect of a national reformation. Mr.
Jacob, therefore, having summoned several of his friends together, and having
obtained their consent to unite in church fellowship for enjoying the
ordinances of Christ in the purest manner, they laid the foundation of the
first independent church in England in the following way. Having observed a day
of solemn fasting and prayer for a blessing upon their undertaking, towards the
close of the solemnity, each of them made an open confession of their faith in
Christ; and then, standing together, they joined hands, and solemnly covenanted
with each other, in the presence of Almighty God to walk together in all God's
ways and ordinances, according as he had already revealed, or should farther
make known to them. Mr. Jacob was then chosen pastor by the suffrage of the
brotherhood; and others were appointed to the office of deacons, with fasting
and prayer, and imposition of hands.
The Independents were much more commendable than
the Brownists; they surpassed them, both in the moderation of their sentiments,
and in the order of their discipline. They did not, like Brown, pour forth
bitter and uncharitable invectives against the churches which were governed by
rules entirely different from theirs, nor pronounce them, on that account,
unworthy of the Christian name. On the contrary, though they considered their
own form of ecclesiastical government as of divine institution, and as
originally introduced by the authority of the apostles, nay, by the apostles
themselves, they had yet candour and charity enough to acknowledge, that true
religion and solid piety might flourish in those communities which were under
the jurisdiction of bishops, or the government of synods and presbyteries. They
were also much more attentive than the Brownists in keeping on foot a regular
ministry in their communities; for, while the latter allowed promisquously all
ranks and orders of men to teach in public, the Independents had, and still
have, a certain number of ministers, chosen respectively by the congregations
where they are fixed; nor is it common for any person among them to speak in
public before he has submitted to a proper examination of his capacity and
talents, and been approved of by the heads of the congregation.
From 1642, the Independents are very frequently
mentioned in the English annals. The charge alleged against them by Rapin (in
his history of England, vol. ii. p. 514. folio ed.) that they could not so much
as endure ordinary ministers in the church, &c. is groundless. He was led
into this mistake by confounding the Independents with the Brownists. Other
charges, no less unjustifiable, have been urged against the Independents by
this celebrated historian, and others. Rapin says, that they abhorred monarchy,
and approved of a republican government: this might have been true with regard
to many persons among them, in common with other sects; but it does not appear,
from any of their public writings, that republican principles formed their
distinguishing characteristic; on the contrary, in a public memorial drawn up
by them in 1647, they declare, that they do not disapprove of any form of civil
government, but do freely acknowledge that a kingly government, bounded by just
and wholesome laws, is allowed by God, and also a good accommodation unto men.
The Independents, however, have been generally ranked among the regicides, and
charged with the death of Charles I. Whether this fact be admitted or denied,
no conclusion can be fairly drawn from the greater prevalence of republican
principles, or from violent proceedings at that period, that can affect the
distinguishing tenets and conduct of the Independents in our times. It is
certain that the present Independents are steady friends to a limited monarchy.
Rapin is farther mistaken when he represents the religious principles of the
English Independents as contrary to those of all the rest of the world. It
appears from two confessions of faith, one composed by Robinson in behalf of
the English Independents in Holland, and published at Leyden in 1619, entitled,
Apologia pro Exulibus Anglis, qui Brownistae vulgo appellantur; and another
drawn up in London in 1658, by the principal members of this community in
England, entitled, "A Declaration of the Faith and Order owned and
practised by the Congregational Churches in England, agreed upon and consented
unto by their Elders and Messengers, in their meeting at the Savoy, Oct. 12th,
1658," as well as from other writings of the Independents, that they
differed from the rest of the reformed in no single point of any consequence,
except that of ecclesiastical government; and their religious doctrines were
almost entirely the same with those adopted by the church of Geneva. During the
administration of Cromwell, the Independents acquired very considerable
reputation and influence; and he made use of them as a check to the ambition of
the Presbyterians, who aimed at a very high degree of ecclesiastical power, and
who had succeeded, soon after the elevation of Cromwell, in obtaining a
parliamentary establishment of their own church government. But after the
restoration, their cause declined; and in 1691 they entered into an association
with the Presbyterians residing in and about London, comprised in nine
articles, that tended to the maintenance of their respective institutions.
These may be found in the second volume of Whiston's Memoirs, and the substance
of them in Mosheim. At this time the Independents and Presbyterians, called
from this association the United Brethren, were agreed with regard to
doctrines, being generally Calvinists, and differed only with respect to
ecclesiastical discipline. But at present, though the English Independents and
Presbyterians form two distinct parties of Protestant Dissenters, they are
distinguished by very triffling differences with regard to church government,
and the denominations are more arbitrarily used to comprehend those who differ
in theological opinions. The Independents are generally more attached to
Calvinism than the Presbyterians. Independentism is peculiar to Great Britain,
the United States, and the Batabian Republic. It was carried first to the
American colonies in 1620, and by successive Puritan emigrants, in 1629, and
1633, from England. One Morel, in the sixteenth century, endeavoured to
introduce it into France; but it was condemned at the synod of Rochelle, where
Beza presided; and again at the synod of Rochelle, in 1644.
Many of the Independents reject the use of all
creeds and confessions draws up by fallible men, though they require of their
teachers a declaration of their belief in the Gospel and its various doctrines,
and their adherence to the Scriptures as the sole standard of faith and
practice. They attribute no virtue whatever to the rite of ordination, upon
which some other churches lay so much stress. According to them, the qualifications
which constitute a regular minister of the New Testament are, a firm belief in
the Gospel, a principle of sincere and unaffected piety, a competent stock of
knowledge, a capacity for leading devotion and communicating, instruction, a
serious inclination to engage in the important employment of promoting the
everlasting salvation of mankind, and ordinarily an invitation to the pastoral
office from some particular society of Christians. Where these things concur,
they consider a person as fitted and authorised for the discharge of every duty
which belongs to the ministerial function; and they believe that the imposition
of hands of bishops or presbyters would convey to him no powers or prerogatives
of which he was not before possessed. But though they attribute no virtue to
ordination, as conveying any new powers, yet they hold with and practise it.
Many of them, indeed, suppose that the essence of ordination does not lie in
the act of the ministers who assist, but in the choice and call of the people,
and the candidate's acceptance of that call; so that their ordination may be
considered only as a public declaration of that agreement. See ORDINATION. They
consider it as their right to choose their own ministers and deacons. They own
no man as head of the church. They disallow of parochial and provincial
subordination; but though they do not think it necessary to assemble synods,
yet, if any be held, they look upon their resolutions as prudential counsels,
but not as decisions to which they are obliged to conform. They consider the
Scriptures as the only criterion of truth. Their worship is conducted in a
decent, plain, and simple manner, without the ostentation of form and the vain
pomp of ceremony.
The congregations of the Independents are very
numerous, both in England and America, and some of them very respectable. This
denomination has produced many characters as eminent for learning and piety as
any church in Christendom; whose works, no doubt, will reflect lasting honour
on their characters and abilities. See CHURCH CONGREGATIONAL; NONCONFORMISTS,
and books under those articles.
A catalogue of prohibited books in the church of Rome. The first catalogues of this kind were made by the inquisitors, and these were afterwards approved of by the council of Trent, after some alteration was made in them by way of retrenchment or addition. Thus an index of heretical books being formed, it was confirmed by a bull of Clement VIII, in 1595, and printed with several introductory rules; by the fourth of which, the use of the Scriptures in the vulgar tongue is forbidden to all persons without a particular licence: and by the tenth rule it is ordained, that no book shall be printed at Rome without the approbation of the pope's vicar, or some person delegated by the pope: nor in any other places, unless allowed by the bishop of the diocese, or some person deputed by him, or by the inquisitor of heretical pravity. The Trent index being thus published, Philip II. of Spain ordered another to be printed at Antwerp in 1571, with considerable enlargements. Another index was published in Spain in 1584, a copy of which was snatched out of the fire when the English plundered Cadiz. Afterwards there were several expurgatory indexes printed at Rome and Naples, and particularly in Spain.
A strong disapprobation of mind, excited by something flagitious in the conduct of another. It does not, as Mr. Cogan observes, always suppose that excess of depravity which alone is capable of committing deeds of horror. Indignation always refers to culpability of conduct, and cannot, like the passion of horror, be extended to distress either of body or mind. It is produced by acts of treachery, abuse of confidence, base ingratitude, &c. which we cannot contemplate without being provoked to anger, and feeling a generous resentment.
In the Romish church, are a remission of the
punishment due to sin, granted by the church, and supposed to save the sinner
from purgatory.
According to the doctrine of the Romish church,
all the good works of the saints, over and above those which were necessary
towards their own justification, are deposited, together with the infinite
merits of Jesus Christ, in one inexhaustible treasury. The keys of this were
committed to St. Peter, and to his successors, the popes, who may open it at
pleasure; and, by transferring a portion of this superabundant merit to any
particular person for a sum of money, may convey to him either the pardon of
his own sins, or a release for any one in whom he is interested from the pains
of purgatory. Such indulgences were first invented in the eleventh century, by
Urban II. as a recompence for those who went in person upon the glorious
enterprise of conquering the Holy Land. They were afterwards granted to those
who hired a soldier for that purpose; and in process of time were bestowed on
such as gave money for accomplishing any pious work enjoined by the pope. The
power of granting indulgences has been greatly abused in the church of Rome.
Pope Leo X., in order to carry on the magnificent structure of St. Peter's, at
Rome, published indulgences, and a plenary remission to all such as should
contribute money towards it. Finding the project take, he granted to Albert
elector of Mentz, and archbishop of Magdeburg, the benefit of the indulgences
of Saxony, and the neighbouring parts, and farmed out those of other countries
to the highest bidders: who, to make the best of the bargain, procured the
ablest preachers to cry up the value of the ware. The form of these indulgences
was as follows:--"May our Lord Jesus Christ have mercy upon thee, and
absolve thee by the merits of his most holy passion. And I, by his authority,
that of his blessed apostles, Peter and Paul, and of the most holy pope,
granted and committed to me in these parts, do absolve thee, first from all
ecclesiastical censures, in whatever manner they have been incurred; then from
all thy sins, transgressions, and excesses, how enormous soever they may be:
even from such as are reserved for the cognizance of the holy see, and as far
as the keys of the holy church extend. I remit to you all punishment which you
deserve in purgatory on their account: and I restore you to the holy sacraments
of the church, to the unity of the faithful, and to that innocence and purity
which you possessed at baptism: so that when you die, the gates of punishment
shall be shut, and the gates of the paradise of delight shall be opened; and if
you shall not die at present, this grace shall remain in full force when you
are at the point of death. In the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost."
According to a book, called the Tax of the sacred Roman Chancery, in which are
contained the exact sums to be levied for the pardon of each particular sin, we
find some of the fees to be thus:
s.
d.
For procuring abortion ............................... 7 6
For simony.............................................. 10 6
For sacrilege........................................... 10 6
For taking a false oath in a criminal case.............. 9 0
For robbing............................................. 12 0
For burning a neighbour's house......................... 12 0
For defiling a virgin................................... 9 0
For lying with a mother, sister, &c..................... 7 6
For murdering a layman.................................. 7 6
For keeping a concubine................................. 10 6
For laying violent hands on a clergyman................. 10 6
And so on.
The terms in which the retailers of indulgences
described their benefits, and the necessity of purchasing them, were so
extravagant that they appear almost incredible. If any man, said they, purchase
letters of indulgence, his soul may rest secure with respect to its salvation.
The souls confined in purgatory, for whose redemption indulgences are
purchased, as soon as the money tinkles in the chest, instantly escape from
that place of torment, and ascend into heaven. That the efficacy of indulgences
was so great, that the most heinous sins, even if one should violate (which was
impossible) the Mother of God, would be remitted and expiated by them, and the
person be freed both from punishment and guilt. That this was the unspeakable
gift of God, in order to reconcile man to himself. that the cross erected by
the preachers of indulgences was equally efficacious with the cross of Christ
itself." "Lo," said they, "the heavens are open: if you
enter not now, when will you enter? For twelve pence you may redeem the soul of
your father out of purgatory; and are you so ungrateful that you will not
rescue the soul of your parent from torment? If you had but one coat, you ought
to strip yourself instantly, and sell it, in order to purchase such
benefit," &c. It was this great abuse of indulgences that contributed
not a little to the reformation of religion in Germany, where Martin Luther
began first to declaim against the preachers of indulgences, and afterwards
against indulgences themselves. Since that time the popes have been more
sparing in the exercise of this power; although it is said, they still carry on
a great trade with them to the Indies, where they are purchased at two rials a
piece, and sometimes more. We are told also that a gentleman not long since
being at Naples, in order that he might be fully ascertained respecting indulgences,
went to the office, and for two sequins purchased a plenary remission of all
sins for himself and any two other persons of his friends or relations, whose
names he was empowered to insert. Haweis's Church Hist. vol. iii. p. 147;
Smith's Errors of the Church of Rome; Watson's Theol. Tracts. vol. v. p. 274;
Mosheim's Eccl. Hist. vol. i. p. 594, quarto.
Diligence, constant application of the mind, or exercise of the body. See DILIGENCE, and IDLENESS.
A scheme which derives its name from that passage in Col. ii. 9. "In him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily," which, according to some, asserts the doctrine of Christ's consisting of two beings; one the self-existent Creator, and the other a creature made into one person by an ineffable union and indwelling, which renders the same attributes and honours equally applicable to both. See PRE-EXISTENCE. Dr. Owen's Glory of Christ, p. 368, 369. Lond. ed. 1679; a Sermon entitled "The true Christ of God above the false Christ of Men,"Ipswich, 1799; Watts's Glory of Christ, p. 6-203; Adam's View of Religions, p. 267.
The quality of not being able to be deceived or
mistaken.
The infallibility of the church of Rome has been
one of the great controversies between the Protestants and Papists. By this
infallibility it is understood, that she cannot at any time cease to be
orthodox in her doctrine, or fall into any pernicious errors; but that she is
constituted, by divine authority, the judge of all controversies of religion,
and that all Christians are obliged to acquiesce in her decisions. This is the
chain which keeps its members fast bound to its communion; the charm which
retains them within its magic circle; the opiate which lays asleep all their
doubts and difficulties: it is likewise the magnet which attracts the desultory
and unstable in other persuasions within the sphere of popery, the foundation
of its whole superstructure, the cement of all its parts, and its fence and
fortress against all inroads and attacks.
Under the idea of this infallibility, the church
of Rome claims, 1. To determine what books are and what are not canonical, and
to oblige all Christians to receive or reject them accordingly.--2. To
communicate authority to the Scripture; or, in other words, that the Scripture
(quoad nos,) as to us, receives its authority from her.--3. To assign and fix
the sense of Scripture, which all Christians are submissively to receive.--4.
To decree as necessary to salvation whatever she judges so, although not
contained in Scripture.--5. To decide all controversies respecting matters of
faith. These are the claims to which the church of Rome pretends, but which we
shall not here attempt to refute, because any man with the Bible in his hand,
and a little common sense, will easily see that they are all founded upon
ignorance, superstition, and error. It is not a little remarkable, however,
that the Roman Catholics themselves are much divided as to the seat of this
infallibility, and which, indeed, may be considered as a satisfactory proof
that no such privilege exists in the church. For is it consistent with reason
to think that God would have imparted so extraordinary a gift to prevent errors
and dissensions in the church, and yet have left an additional cause or error
and dissension, viz, the uncertainty of the place of its abode? No,
surely--Some place this infallibility in the pope or bishop of Rome; some in a
general council; others in neither pope nor council separately, but in both
conjointly; whilst others are said to place it in the church diffusive, or in
all churches throughout the world. But that it could not be deposited in the
pope is evident, for many popes have been heretics, and on that account
censured and deposed, and therefore could not have been infallible. That it
could not be placed in a general council is as evident; for general councils
have actually erred. Neither could it be placed in the pope and council
conjointly; for two fallibles could not make on infallible any more than two
ciphers could make an integer. To say that it is lodged in the church universal
or diffusive, is equally as erroneous; for this would be useless and
insignificant, because it could never be exercised. The whole church could not
meet to make decrees, or to choose representatives, or to deliver their
sentiments on any question started; and, less than all would not be the whole
church, and so could not claim that privilege.
The most general opinion, however, it is said, is
that of its being seated in a pope and general council. The advocates for this
opinion consider the pope as the vicar of Christ, head of the church, and
centre of unity; and therefore conclude that his concurrence with and
approbation of the decrees of a general council are necessary, and sufficient
to afford it an indispensable sanction and plenary authority. A general council
they regard as the church representative, and suppose that nothing can be
wanting to ascertain the truth of any controversial point, when the pretended
head of the church and its members, assembled in their supposed
representatives, mutually concur and coincide in judicial definitions and
decrees, but that infallibility attends their coalition and conjunction in all
their determinations.
Every impartial person, who considers this
subject with the least degree of attention, must clearly perceive that neither
any individual nor body of Christians have any ground from reason or Scripture
for pretending to infallibility. It is evidently the attribute of the Supreme
Being alone, which we have all the foundation imaginable to conclude he has not
communicated to any mortal, or associations of mortals. The human being who
challenges infallibility seems to imitate the pride and presumption of Lucifer,
when he said,--I will ascend, and will be like the Most High. A claim to it was
unheard of in the primitive and purest ages of the church; but became, after
that period, the arrogant pretension of papal ambition. History plainly informs
us, that the bishops of Rome, on the declension of the western Roman empire,
began to put in their claim of being the supreme and infallible heads of the
Christian church; which they at length established by their deep policy and
unremitting efforts; by the concurrence of fortunate circumstances; by the
advantages which they reaped from the necessities of some princes, and the
superstition of others; and by the general and excessive credulity of the
people. However, when they had grossly abused this absurd pretension, and
committed various acts of injustice, tyranny, and cruelty; when the blind
veneration for the papal dignity had been greatly diminished by the long and
scandalous schism occasioned by contending popes; when these had been for a
considerable time roaming about Europe, fawning on princes, squeezing their
adherents, and cursing their rivals; and when the councils of Constance and
Basil had challenged and exercised the right of deposing and electing the
bishops of Rome, then their pretensions to infallibility were called in
question, and the world discovered that councils were a jurisdiction superior
to that of the towering pontiffs. Then it was that this infallibility was
transferred by many divines from popes to general authority of a council above
that of a pope spread vastly, especially under the profligate pontificate of
Alexander VI. and the martial one of Julius II. The popes were thought by
numbers to be too unworthy possessors of so rich a jewel; at the same time it
appeared to be of too great a value, and of too extensive consequence, to be
parted with entirely. It was, therefore, by the major part of the Roman church,
deposited with, or made the property of general councils, either solely or
conjointly with the pope. See Smith's Errors of the Church of Rome detected;
and a list of writers under article POPERY.
The admission of infants to the ordinance of the
Lord's supper. It has been debated by some, whether or no infants should be
admitted to this ordinance. One of the greatest advocates for this practice was
Mr.Pierce. He pleads the use of it even unto this day among the Greeks, and in
the Bohemian churches till near the time of the reformation; but especially
from the custom of the ancient churches, as it appears from many passages in
Photius, Augustin, and Cyprian. But Dr. Doddridge observes, that Mr. Pierce's
proof from the more ancient fathers is very defective. His arguments from
Scripture chiefly depend upon this general medium; that Christians succeeding
to the Jews as God's people, and being grafted upon that stock, their infants
have a right to all the privileges of which they are capable, till forfeited by
some immoralities: and consequently have a right to partake of this ordinance,
as the Jewish children had to eat of the passover and other sacrifices; besides
this, he pleads those texts which speak of the Lord's supper as received by all
Christians.
The most obvious answer to all this, is that
which is taken from the incapacity of infants to examine themselves, and
discern the Lord's body; but he answers that this precept is only given to
persons capable of understanding and complying with it, as those which require
faith in order to baptism are interpreted by the Paedo-baptists. As for his
argument from the Jewish children eating the sacrifice, it is to be considered
that this was not required as circumcision was; the males were not necessarily
brought to the temple till they were twelve years old, Luke ii. 42. and the
sacrifices they ate of were chiefly peace-offerings, which became the common
food to all that were clean in the family, and were not looked upon as acts of
devotion to such a degree as our eucharist is; though, indeed, they were a
token of their acknowledging the divinity of that God to whom they had been
offered, 1 Cor. x. 18. and even the passover was a commemoration of a temporal
deliverance; nor is there any reason to believe that its reference to the
Messiah was generally understood by the Jews.
On the whole, it is certain there would be more
danger of a contempt arising to the Lord's supper from the admission of
infants, and of confusion and trouble to other communicants; to that not being
required in Scripture, it is much the best to omit it. When children are grown
up to a capacity of behaving decently, they may soon be instructed in the
nature and design of the ordinance; and if they appear to understand it, and
behave for some competent time of trial in a manner suitable to that
profession, it would probably be advisable to admit them to communion, though
very young; which, by the way, might be a good security against many of the snares
to which youth are exposed. Doddridge's Lectures, lec. 207; Pierce's Essay on
the Eucharist, p. 76, &c.; Witsius on Con. b. 4. c. 17, $ 30,32; J. Frid.
Mayer Diss. de Eucharistia Infantum; Zornius Hist. Eucharist. Infantum, p. 18;
Theol. and Bib Mag. Jan. and April, 1806.
Salvation of. "Various opinions," says an acute writer, "concerning the future state of infants have been adopted. Some think, all dying in infancy are annihilated; for, say they, infants, being incapable of moral god or evil, are not proper objects of reward or punishment. Others think that they share a fate similar to adults; a part saved, and a part perish. Others affirm all are saved because all are immortal and all are innocent. Others, perplexed with these diverse sentiments, think better to leave the subject untouched. Cold comfort to parents who bury their families in infancy! The most probable opinion seems to be, that they are all saved, through the merits of the Mediator, with an everlasting salvation. This has nothing in it contrary to the perfections of God, or to any declaration of the Holy Scriptures; and it is highly agreeable to all those passages which affirm where sin hath abounded, grace hath much more abounded. On these principles, the death of Christ saves more than the fall of Adam lost." If the reader be desirous of examining the subject, we refer him to p. 415, vol. ii. Robinson's Claude; Gillard and William's Essays of Infant Salvation; An Attempt to elucidate Rom. v. 12, by an anonymous writer; Watts's Ruin and Recovery, p. 324, 327; Edwards on Original Sin, p. 431, 434; Doddridge's Lect. lect. 168; Ridgley's Body of Div. vol. i. p. 330 to 336.
Want of faith in God, or the disbelief of the truths of revelation, and the great principles of religion. If we enquire into the rise of infidelity, we shall find it does not take its origin from the result of sober enquiry, close investigation, or full conviction; but it is rather, as one observes, "The slow production of a careless and irreligious life, operating together with prejudices and erroneous conceptions concerning the nature of the leading doctrines of Christianity. It may, therefore, be laid down as an axiom, that infidelity is, in general, a disease of the heart more than of the understanding; for we always find that infidelity increases in proportion as the general morals decline. If we consider the nature and effect of this principle, we shall find that it subverts the whole foundation of morals; it tends directly to the destruction of a taste for moral excellence, and promotes the growth of those vices which are the most hostile to social happiness, especially vanity, ferocity, and unbridled sensuality. As to the progress of it, it is certain that, of late years, it has made rapid strides. Lord Herbert did not, indeed, so much impugn the doctrine or the morality of the Scriptures, as attempt to supersede their necessity, by endeavouring to show that the great principles of the unity of God, a moral government, and a future world, are taught with sufficient clearness by the light of nature. Bolingbroke, and others of his successors, advanced much farther, and attempted to invalidate the proofs of the moral character of the Deity, and consequently all expectation of rewards and punishments, leaving the Supreme Being no other perfections than those which belong to a first cause, or Almighty contriver. After him, at a considerable distance, followed Hume, the most subtle of all, who boldly sinned to introduce an universal scepticism, and to pour a more than Egyptians darkness into the whole region of morals. Since his time, sceptical writers have sprung up in abundance, and infidelity has allured multitudes to its standard; the young and superficial, by its dexterous sophistry; the vain, by the literary fame of its champion; and the prodigate, by the licentiousness of its principles." But let us ask, What will be its end? Is there any thing in the genius of this principle that will lead us to suppose it will reign triumphant? So far from it, we have reason to believe that it will be banished from the earth. Its inconsistency with reason; its incongruity with the nature of man; its cloudy and obscure prospects; its unsatisfying nature; its opposition to the dictates of conscience; its pernicious tendency to eradicate every just principle from the breast of man, and to lead the way for every species of vice and immorality, show us that it cannot flourish, but must finally fall. And, as Mr. Hall justly observes, "We have nothing to fear; for, to an attentive observer of the signs of the times, it will appear one of the most extraordinary plaenomena of this eventful crisis, that, amidst the ravages of atheism and infidelity, real religion is on the increase; for while infidelity is marking its progress by devastation and ruin, by the prostration of thrones and concussion of kingdoms, thus appalling the inhabitants of the world, and compelling them to take refuge in the church of God, the true sanctuary; the stream of divine knowledge, unobserved, is flowing in new channels; winding its course among humble valleys, refreshing thirsty deserts, and enriching, with far other and higher blessings than those of commerce, the most distant climes and nations; until, agreeably to the prediction of prophecy, the knowledge of the Lord shall fill and cover the whole earth." See Hall's admirable Sermon on Infidelity; Fuller's Gospel of Christ its own Witness; Bishop Watson's Apology for the Bible; Wilberforce's Practical View, $ 3. ch. 7; Bp. Horne's Letters on Infidelity, and books under article Deism.
Applied to the mind, denotes frailty, weakness.
It has been a question what may properly be denominated sins of infirmity.
1. Nothing, it is said, can be excused under that
name which at the time of its commission is known to be a sin.--2. Nothing can
be called a sin of infirmity which is contrary to the express letter of any of
the commandments.--3. Nothing will admit of a just and sufficient excuse upon
the account of infirmity which a man beforehand considers and deliberates with
himself, whether it be a sin or no. A sin of infirmity is, 1. Such a failing as
proceeds from excusable ignorance.--2. Or unavoidable surprise.--3. Or want of
courage and strength, Rom. xv. 1.
By infirmity also we understand the corruptions
that are still left in the heart (notwithstanding a person may be sanctified in
part,) and which sometimes break out. These may be permitted to humble us; to
animate our vigilance; perhaps that newly convinced sinners might not be
discouraged by a sight of such perfection they might despair of ever attaining
to; to keep us prayerful and dependent; to prevent those honours which some
would be ready to give to human nature rather than to God; and, lastly, to
excite in us a continual desire for heaven. Let us be cautious and watchful,
however, against sin in all its forms: for it argues a deplorable state of mind
when men love to practise sin, and then lay it upon constitution, the infirmity
of nature, the decree of God, the influence of Satan, and thus attempt to
excuse themselves by saying they could not avoid it. Clarke's Serm. ser. 12,
vol. ix. Massilon's Serm. vol. ii. p. 213, Eng. trans.
Infinity is taken in two senses entirely different, i. e. in a positive and a negative one. Positive infinity is a quality of being perfect in itself, or capable of receiving no addition. Negative is the quality of being boundless, unlimited, or endless. That God is infinite is evident; for as Doddridge observes, 1. If he be limited, it must either be by himself, or by another; but no wise being would abridge himself, and there could be no other being to limit God.--2. Infinity follows from self-existence; for a necessity that is not universal must depend on some external cause, which a self-existent Being does not.--3. Creation is so great an act of power, that we can imagine nothing impossible to that Being who has performed it, but must therefore ascribe to him infinite power.--4. It is more honourable to the Divine Being to conceive of him as infinite, than finite.--5. The Scriptures represent all his attributes as Infinite. His understanding is infinite, Psal. cxlvii. 5. His knowledge and wisdom, Rom. xi. 33. His power, Rom. i. 20. Heb. xi. 3. His goodness, Psal. xvi. 2. His purity, holiness, and justice, Job iv. 17,18. Isa. vi. 2,3.--6. His omnipotence and eternity prove his infinity; for were he not infinite, he would be bounded by space and by time, which he is not. Doddridge's Lect. lec. 49; Watts's Ontology, ch. 17; Locke on Underst. vol. i. ch. 17; Howe's Works, vol. i. p. 63, 64, 67.
A term made use of to denote the operations of
the Divine Being upon the mind. This doctrine of divine influences has been
much called in question of late; but we may ask, 1. What doctrine can be more
reasonable? "The operations which the power of God carries on in the
natural world are no less mysterious than those which the Spirit performs in
the moral world. If men, by their councils and suggestions, can influence the
minds of one another, must not divine suggestion produce a much greater effect?
Surely the Father of spirits, by a thousand ways, has access to the spirits he
has made, so as to give them what determination, or impart to them what
assistance he thinks proper, without injuring their frame or disturbing their
rational powers."
We may observe, 2. Nothing can be more
scriptural. Eminent men from the patriarchal age down to St. John, the latest
writer, believed in this doctrine, and ascribed their religious feelings to
this source. Our Lord strongly and repeatedly inculcated this truth; and that
he did not mean miraculous, but moral influences of the Spirit, is evident,
John iii. 3. Matt. vii. 22,23. John vi. 44,46. See also, John xii. 32,40. Rom.
viii. 9. 1 Cor. ii. 14.--3. And we may add, nothing can be more necessary, if
we consider the natural depravity of the heart, and the insufficiency of all
human means to render ourselves either holy or happy without a supernatural
power. See William's Historic Defence of Experimental Religion; Williams's
Answer to Belsham, let. 13; Hurrion's Sermons on the Spirit; Owen on the
Spirit.
A denomination of Calvinistic dissenters, who are the followers of B. Ingham, esq. who in the last century was a character of great note in the north of England. About the year 1735, Mr. Ingham was at Queen's college with Mr. Hervey and other friends, but soon afterwards adopted the religious opinions and zeal of Wesley and Whitfield. We do not know the cause of his separation from these eminent men; but it seems in a few years afterwards he became the leader of many numerous societies, distinct from the methodists. They received their members by lot, and required them to declare before the church their experience, that the whole society might judge of the gracious change which had been wrought upon their hearts. It happened in a few years, that some individuals, who were much respected, and who applied for admission, instead of speaking of their own attainments, or the comfortable impressions on their minds, which they only considered as productive of strife and vain glory, declared their only hope was the finished work of Jesus Christ, and as to themselves they were sensible of their own vileness. Such confessions as this threw the congregation into some confusion, which was considerably increased when they found, that, on their having recourse as usual to the lot, that there were votes against their admission, which was considered as a rejection from the Lord. On this they were led to examine more particularly both their church order and doctrines. After this time, Mr. Ingham became much more orthodox in his sentiments, and new-modelled his churches. The book which he published is in general well thought of by the Independents. He contends very strongly for salvation by the imputation of Christ's righteousness; and as to doctrine, the chief point wherein the Inghamites differ from the Independents, is respecting the Trinity. The common manner of speaking of the Divine Three as distinct persons, they decisively condemn. They do not consider a plurality of elders as necessary in a church to administer the Lord's Supper. In other respects they much esteem the writings of Mr. R. Sandeman. Their numbers have not been so numerous since they became more strict in their public worship.
The vice of being insensible to favours received, without any endeavour to acknowledge and repay them. It is sometimes applied to the act of returning evil for good. Ingratitude, it is said, is no passion: for the God of nature has appointed no motion of the spirits whereby it might be excited; it is, therefore, a mere vice, arising from pride, stupidity, or narrowness of soul.
See SIN.
A violation of the rights of another. Some, says Grove, distinguish between injustitia and injuria. Injustice is opposed to justice in general, whether negative or positive;an injury to negative justice alone. See JUSTICE. An injury, is wilfully doing to another what ought not to be done. this is injustice, too, but not the whole idea of it; for it is injustice, also to refuse or neglect doing what ought to be done. An injury must be wilfully committed; whereas it is enough to make a thing unjust, that it happens through a culpable negligence. 1. We may injure a person in his soul, by misleading his judgment; by corrupting the Imagination; perverting the will; and wounding the soul with grief. Persecutors who succeed in their compulsive measures, though they cannot alter the real sentiments by external violence, yet sometimes injure the soul by making the man a hypocrite.--2. We may injure another in his body, by homicide, murder, preventing life, dismembering the body by wounds, blows, slavery, and imprisonment, or any unjust restraint upon its liberty; by robbing it of its chastity, or prejudicing its health.--3. We may injure another in his name and character, by our own false and rash judgments of him; by false witness; by charging a man to his face with a crime which either we ourselves have forged, or which we know to have been forged by some other person; by detraction or backbiting; by reproach, or exposing another for some natural imbecility either in body or mind; or for some calamity into which he is fallen, or some miscarriage of which he has been guilty; by inuendos, or indirect accusations that are not true. Now if we consider the value of character, the resentment which the injurious person has of such treatment when it comes to his own turn to suffer it, the consequence of a man's losing his good name, and finally, the difficulty of making reparation, we must at once see the injustice of lessening another's good character. There are these two considerations which should sometimes restrain us from speaking the whole truth of our neighbour, when it is to his disadvantage. (1.) That he may possibly live to see his folly, and repent and grow better.--(2.) Admitting that we speak the truth, yet it is a thousand to one but, when it is handed about for some time, it will contract a deal of falsehood.--4. We may injure a person in his relations and dependencies. In his servants, by corrupting them; in his children, by drawing them into evil courses; in his wife, by sowing strife, attempting to alienate her affections.--5. We may be guilty of injuring another in his worldly goods or possessions. 1. By doing him a mischief, without any advantage to ourselves, through envy and malice.--2. By taking what is another's, which is theft. See Grove's Mor. Phil. ch. 8. p. 2; Watts's Sermons, vol. ii. ser. 33; Tillotson's Sermons, ser. 42.
Forgiveness of. See FORGIVENESS.
See INJURY.
Acting in perfect consonance to the law, without incurring guilt or consequent punishment. See MAN.
In the church of Rome, a tribunal, in several
Roman catholic countries, erected by the popes for the examination and
punishment of heretics. This court was founded in the twelfth century, under
the patronage of pope Innocent, who issued out orders to excite the catholic
princes and people to extirpate heretics, to search into their number and
quality, and to transmit a faithful account thereof to Rome. Hence they were
called inquisitors, and gave birth to this formidable tribunal, call the
Inquisition. That nothing might be wanting to render this spiritual court
formidable and tremendous, the Roman pontiffs persuaded the European princes,
and more especially the emperor Frederick II. and Lewis IX. king of France, not
only to enact the most barbarous laws against heretics, and to commit to the
flames, by the ministry of public justice, those who were pronounced such by
the inquisitors, but also to maintain the inquisitors in their office, and
grant them their protection in the most open and solemn manner. The edicts to
this purpose issued out by Frederick II. are well known; edicts sufficient to
have excited the greatest horror, and which rendered the most illustrious piety
and virtue incapable of saving from the cruellest death such as had the
misfortune to be disagreeable to the inquisitors. These abominable laws were
not, however, sufficient to restrain the just indignation of the people against
those inhuman judges, whose barbarity was accompanied with superstition and
arrogance, with a spirit of suspicion and perfidy; nay, even with temerity and
imprudence. Accordingly, they were insulted by the multitude in many places,
were driven in an ignominious manner out of some cities, and were put to death
in others; and Conrad, of Marpurg, the first German inquisitor who derived his
commission from Gregory IX. was one of the many victims that were sacrificed on
this occasion to the vengeance of the public, which his incredible barbarities
had raised to a dreadful degree of vehemence and fury.
This diabolical tribunal takes cognizance of
heresy, Judaism, Mahometanism, sodomy, and polygamy; and the people stand in so
much fear of it, that parents deliver up their children, husbands their wives,
and masters their servants, to its officers, without daring in the least to
murmur. The prisoners are kept for a long time, till they themselves turn their
own accusers, and declare the cause of their imprisonment, for which they are
neither told their crime, nor confronted with witnesses. As soon as they are
imprisoned, their friends go into mourning, and speak of them as dead, not
daring to solicit their pardon, lest they should be brought in as accomplices.
When there is no shadow of proof against the pretended criminal, he is
discharged, after suffering the most cruel tortures, a tedious and dreadful
imprisonment, and the loss of the greatest part of his effects. The sentence
against prisoners is pronounced publicly, and with extraordinary solemnity. In
Portugal they erect a theatre capable of holding three thousand persons, in
which they place a rich altar, and raise seats on each side, in the form of an
amphitheatre. There the prisoners are placed, and over against them is a high
chair, whither they are called one by one to hear their doom from one of the
inquisitors. These unhappy persons know what they are to suffer by the clothes
they wear that day; those who appear in their own clothes are discharged on
paying a fine; those who have a santo benito, or strait yellow coat without
sleeves, charged with St. Andrew's cross, have their lives, but forfeit all
their effects; those who have the resemblance of flames made of red serge sewed
upon their santo benito, without any cross, are pardoned, but threatened to be
burnt if ever they relapse; but, those who, besides those flames, have on their
santo benito their own picture surrounded with devils, are condemned to expire
in the flames. The inquisitors, who are ecclesiastics, do not pronounce the
sentence of death, but form and read an act, in which they say, that the
criminal, being convicted of such a crime, by his own confession, is with much
reluctance, delivered to the secular power, to be punished according to his
demerits: and this writing they give to the seven judges, who attend at the
right side of the altar, and immediately pass sentence. For the conclusion of
this horrid scene, see ACT OF FAITH. We rejoice however, to hear, that in many
Roman Catholic countries, the inquisition is not shut. May the God of mercy and
love prevent its ever being employed again! See Baker's History of the
Inquisition; and Limborch's History of the Inquisition, translated by Chandler;
a View of the Inquisition in Portugal in Geddes's Tracts; Lavalle's History of
the Inquisition.
The conveying of certain extraordinary and
supernatural notions or motions into the soul; or it denotes any supernatural
influence of God upon the mind of a rational creature, whereby he is formed to
any degree of intellectual improvement, to which he could not, or would not, in
fact, have attained in his present circumstances in a natural way. Thus the
prophets are said to have spoken by divine inspiration. 1. An inspiration of
superintendency, in which God does so influence and direct the mind of any person
as to keep him more secure from error in some various and complex discourse,
than he would have been merely by the use of his natural faculties.--2. Plenary
superintendent inspiration, which excludes any mixture of error at all from the
performance so superintended.--3. Inspiration of elevation, where the faculties
act in a regular, and, as it seems, in a common manner, yet are raised to an
extraordinary degree, so that the composure shall, upon the whole, have more of
the true sublime or pathetic than natural genius could have given.--4.
Inspiration of suggestion, where the use of the faculties is superseded, and
God does, as it were, speak directly to the mind, making such discoveries are
to be communicated, if they are designed as a message to others. It is
generally allowed that the Scriptures were written by divine inspiration. The
matter of them, the spirituality and elevation of their design, the majesty and
simplicity of their style, the agreement of their various parts; their
wonderful efficacy on mankind; the candour, disinterestedness, and uprightness
of the penmen; their astonishing preservation; the multitude of miracles
wrought in confirmation of the doctrines they contain, and the exact
fulfillment of their predictions, prove this. It has been disputed, however,
whether this inspiration is in the most absolute sense, plenary. As this is a
subject of importance, and ought to be carefully studied by every Christian, in
order that he may render a reason of the hope that is in him, I shall here subjoin
the remarks of an able writer, who, though he may differ from some others as to
the terms made use of above, yet I am persuaded his arguments will be found
weighty and powerful. "There are many things in the Scriptures,"
says, Mr. Dick, "which the writers might have known, and probably did
know, by ordinary means. As persons possessed of memory, judgment, and other
intellectual faculties, which are common to men, they were able to relate
certain events in which they had been personally concerned, and to make such
occasional reflections as were suggested by particular subjects and
occurrences. In these cases no supernatural influence was necessary to
invigorate their minds; it was only necessary that they should be infallibly
preserved from error. It is with respect to such passages of Scripture alone,
as did not exceed the natural ability of the writers to compose, that I would
admit the notion of superintendence, if it should be admitted at all. Perhaps
this word, though of established use and almost undisputed authority, should be
entirely laid aside, as insufficient to express even the lowest degree of
inspiration. In the passages of Scripture which we are now considering, I
conceive the writers to have been not merely superintended, that they might commit
no error, but likewise to have been moved or excited by the Holy Ghost to
record particular events, and set down particular observations. The passages
written in consequence of the direction and under the care of the Divine
Spirit, may be said, in an inferior sense, to be inspired; whereas if the men
had written them at the suggestion of their own spirit, they would not have
possessed any more authority though they had been free from error, than those
parts of profane writings which are agreeable to truth.
2. "There are other parts of the Scriptures
in which the faculties of the writers were supernaturally invigorated and
elevated. It is impossible for us, and perhaps it was not possible for the
inspired person himself, to determine where nature ended and inspiration began.
It is enough to know, that there are many parts of Scripture in which, though
the unassisted mind might have proceeded some steps, a divine impulse was
necessary to enable it to advance. I think, for example, that the evangelists
could not have written the history of Christ if they had not enjoyed miraculous
aid. Two of them, Matthew and John, accompanied our Saviour during the space of
three years and a half. At the close of this period, or rather several years
after it, when they wrote their Gospels, we may be certain that they had
forgotten many of his discourses and miracles; that they recollected others
indistinctly; and that they would have been in danger or producing an
inaccurate and unfair account, by confounding one thing with another. Besides,
from so large a mass of particulars, men of uncultivated minds, who were not in
the habit of distinguishing and classifying, could not have made a proper
selection; nor would persons unskilled in the art of composition have been able
to express themselves in such terms as should insure a faithful representation
of doctrines and facts, and with such dignity as the nature of the subject
required. A divine influence, therefore, must have been exerted on their minds,
by which their memories and judgments were strengthened, and they were enabled
to relate the doctrines and miracles of their Master in a manner the best
fitted to impress the readers of their histories. The promise of the Holy Ghost
to bring to their remembrance all things whatsoever Christ had said to them,
proves, that, in writing their histories, their mental powers were endowed, by
his agency, with more than usual vigour.
"Farther; it must be allowed that in several
passages of Scripture there is found such elevation of thought and of style, as
clearly shows that the powers of the writers were raised above their ordinary
pitch. If a person of moderate talents should give as elevated a description of
the majesty and attributes of God, or reason as profoundly on the mysterious
doctrines of religion, as a man of the most exalted genius and extensive
learning, we could not fail to be convinced that he was supernaturally
assisted; and the conviction would be still stronger, if his composition should
far transcend the highest efforts of the human mind. Some of the sacred writers
were taken from the lowest ranks of life; and yet sentiments so dignified, and
representations of divine things so grand and majestic, occur in their
writings, that the noblest flights of human genius, when compared with them,
appear cold and insipid.
3. "It is manifest, with respect to many
passages of Scripture, that the subjects of which they treat must have been
directly revealed to the writers. they could not have been known by any natural
means, nor was the knowledge of them attainable by a simple elevation of the
faculties. With the faculties of an angel we could not discover the purposes of
the divine mind. This degree of inspiration we attribute to those who were
empowered to reveal heavenly mysteries, 'which eye had not seen, and ear had
not heard,' to those who were sent with particular messages from God to his
people, and to those who were employed to predict future events. The plan of
redemption being an effect of the sovereign councils of heaven, it could not
have been known but by a communication from the Father of Lights.
"This kind of inspiration has been called
the inspiration of suggestion. It is needless to dispute about a word; but
suggestion seeming to express an operation on the mind, by which ideas are
excited in it, is of too limited signification to denote the various modes in
which the prophets and apostles were made acquainted with supernatural truths.
God revealed himself to them not only by suggestion, but by dreams, visions,
voices, and the ministry of angels. This degree of inspiration, in strict
propriety of speech should be called revelation; a word preferable to
suggestion, because it is expressive of all the ways in which God communicated
new ideas to the minds of his servants. It is a word, too, chosen by the Holy
Ghost himself, to signify the discovery of truths formerly unknown to the
apostles. The last book of the New Testament, which is a collection of
prophecies, is called the Revelation of Jesus Christ. Paul says, that he
received the Gospel by revelation; that 'by revelation the mystery was made
known to him, which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as
it was then revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit' and in
another place, having observed that 'eye had not seen, nor ear heard, neither
had entered into the heart of man the things which God had prepared for them
that love him,' he adds, "But God hath revealed them unto us by his
Spirit," Rev.i.1. Gal. i.12. Eph. ii. 5. 1 Cor. ii. 9,10.
"I have not names to designate the other two
kinds of inspiration. The names used by Doddridge, and others, Superintendence,
Elevation, and Suggestion, do not convey the ideas stated in the three
preceding particulars, and are liable to other objections, besides those which
have been mentioned. This account of the inspiration of the Scriptures has, I
think, these two recommendations: that there is no part of Scriptures which
does not fall under one or other of the foregoing heads; and that the different
degrees of the agency of the Divine Spirit on the minds of the different
writers are carefully discriminated.
"Some men have adopted very strange and
dangerous notions respecting the inspiration of the Scriptures. Dr. Priestley
denies that they were written by a particular divine inspiration; and asserts
that the writers, though men of the greatest probity, were fallible, and have
actually committed mistakes in their narrations and their reasonings. But this
man and his followers find it their interest to weaken and set aside the
authority of the Scriptures, as they have adopted a system of religion from
which all the distinguishing doctrines of revelation are excluded. Others
consider the Scriptures as inspired in those places where they profess to
deliver the word of God; but in other places, especially in the historical
parts, they ascribe to them only the same authority which is due to the
writings of well informed and upright men. But as this distinction is perfectly
arbitrary, having no foundation in any thing said by the sacred writers
themselves, so it is liable to very material objections. It represents our Lord
and his apostles, when they speak of the Old Testament, as having attested,
without any exception or limitation, a number of books as divinely inspired,
while some of them were partly, and some were almost entirely, human
compositions: it supposes the writers of both Testaments to have profanely
mixed their own productions with the dictates of the Spirit, and to have passed
the unhallowed compound on the world as genuine. In fact, by denying that they
were constantly under infallible guidance, it leaves us utterly at a loss to
know when we should or should not believe them. If they could blend their own
stories with the revelations made to them, how can I be certain that they have
not, on some occasions, published, in the name of God, sentiments of their own,
to which they were desirous to gain credit and authority? Who will assure me of
their perfect fidelity in drawing a line of distinction between the divine and
the human parts of their writings? The denial of the plenary inspiration of the
Scripture tends to unsettle the foundations of our faith, involves us in doubt
and perplexity, and leaves us no other method of ascertaining how much we
should believe, but by an appeal to reason. But when reason is invested with
the authority of a judge, not only is revelation dishonoured and its author
insulted, but the end for which it was given is completely defeated.
"A question of very great importance demands
our attention, while we are endeavouring to settle, with precision, the notion
of the inspiration of the Scriptures: it relates to the words in which the
sacred writers have expressed their ideas. Some think, that in the choice of
words they were left to their own discretion, and that the language is human,
though the matter be divine; while others believe, that in their expressions,
as well as in their sentiments, they were under the infallible direction of the
Spirit. It is the last opinion which appears to be most conformable to truth,
and it may be supported by the following reasoning.
"Every man who hath attended to the
operations of his own mind, knows that we think in words, or that, when we form
a train or combination of ideas, we clothe them with words; and that the ideas
which are not thus clothed, are indistinct and confused. Let a man try to think
upon any subject, moral or religious, without the aid of language, and he will
either experience a total cessation of thought, or, as this seems impossible,
at least while we are awake, he will feel himself constrained, notwithstanding
his utmost endeavours, to have recourse to words as the instrument of his
mental operations. As a great part of the Scriptures was suggested or revealed
to the writers; as the thoughts or sentiments, which were perfectly new to
them, were conveyed into their minds by the Spirit, it is plain that they must
have been accompanied with words proper to express them; and, consequently, that
the words were dictated by the same influences on the mind which communicated
the ideas. The ideas could not have come without the words, because without
them they could not have been conceived. A notion of the form and qualities of
a material object may be produced by subjecting it to our senses; but there is
no conceivable method of making us acquainted with new abstract truths, or with
things which do not lie within the sphere of sensation, but by conveying to the
mind, in some way or other, the words significant of them.--In all those were
written by revelation, it is manifest that the words were inspired; and this is
still more evident with respect to those passages which the writers themselves
did not understand. No man could write an intelligible discourse on a subject
which he does not understand, unless he were furnished with the words as well
as the sentiments; and that the penmen of the Scriptures did not always
understand what they wrote, might be safely inferred from the comparative
darkness of the dispensation under which some of them lived; and is intimated
by Peter, when he says, that the prophets 'enquired and searched diligently
what, and what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did
signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory
that should follow.' 1 Pet. i. 10,11.
"In other passages of Scripture, those not
excepted in which the writers relate such things as had fallen within the
compass or their own knowledge, we shall be disposed to believe that the words
are inspired, if we calmly and seriously weigh the following considerations. If
Christ promised to his disciples, that, when they were brought before kings and
governors for his sake, 'it should be given them in that same hour what they
should speak, and that the Spirit of the Father should speak in them.' Matt. x.
19,20. Luke xii. 11,12. a promise which cannot be reasonably understood to
signify less than that both words and sentiments should be dictated to them, it
is fully as credible that they should be assisted in the same manner when they
wrote, especially as the record was to last through all ages, and to be a rule
of faith to all the nations of the earth. Paul affirms that he and the other
apostles spoke 'not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the
Holy Ghost taught' 1 Cor. ii. 13. and this general assertion may be applied to
their writings as well as to their sermons. Besides, every person who hath
reflected upon the subject, is aware of the importance of a proper selection of
words in expressing our sentiments; and knows how easy it is for a heedless or
unskillful person not only to injure the beauty and weaken the efficacy of a
discourse by the impropriety of his language, but by substituting one word for
another, to which it seems to be equivalent, to alter the meaning, and perhaps
render it totally different. If, then, the sacred writers had not been directed
in the choice of words, how could we have been assured that those which they
have chosen were the most proper? Is it not possible, nay, is it not certain,
that they would have sometimes expressed themselves inaccurately, as many of
them were illiterate; an by consequence would have obscured and misrepresented
the truth? In this case, how could our faith have securely rested on their
testimony? Would not the suspicion of error in their writings have rendered it
necessary, before we received them, to try them by the standard of reason? and
would not the authority and the design of revelation have thus been overthrown?
We must conclude, therefore, that the words of Scripture are from God, as well
as the matter; or we shall charge him with a want of wisdom in transmitting his
truths through a channel by which they might have been, and most probably have
been, polluted.
"To the inspiration of the words, the
difference in the style of the sacred writers seems to be an objection;
because, if the Holy Ghost were the author of the words, the style might be
expected to be uniformly the same. But in answer to this objection it may be
observed, that the Divine Spirit, whose operations are various, might act
differently on different persons, according to the natural turn of their minds.
He might enable one man, for instance, to write more sublimely than another,
because he was naturally of a more exalted genius than the other, and the
subject assigned to him demanded more elevated language; or he might produce a
difference in the style of the same man, by raising, at one time, his faculties
above their ordinary state; and by leaving them at another, to act according to
their native energy under his inspection and control. We should not suppose
that inspiration, even in its higher degrees, deprived those who were the
subjects of it, of the use of their faculties. They were, indeed, the organs of
the Spirit; but they were conscious, intelligent organs. They were dependent,
but distinct agents; and the operation of their mental powers, though elevated
and directed by superior influence, was analogous to their ordinary mode of
procedure. It is easy, therefore, to conceive that the style of the writers of
the Scriptures should differ, just as it would have differed if they had not
been inspired. A perfect uniformity of style could not have taken place, unless
they had all been inspired in the same degree, and by inspiration their
faculties had been completely suspended, so that divine truths were conveyed by
them in the same passive manner in which a pipe affords a passage to water, or
a trumpet to the breath." See Dick's Essay on the Inspiration of the
Scriptures; Hawker on Plenary Inspiration; Appendix to 3d vol. of Doddridge's
Expositor; Calamy and Bennett on Inspiration; Dr. Stennett on the Authority and
Use of Scripture; Parry's Enquiry into the Nature and Extent of the Inspiration
of the Apostles; Brown's Nat. and Rev. Relig. p. 78; and article CHRISTIANITY
and SCRIPTURE, in this work.
That power which acts on and impels any creature to any particular manner of conduct, not by a view of the beneficial consequences, but merely from a strong impulse supposed necessary in its effects, and to be given them to supply the place of reason.
An established custom or law; a precept, maxim, or principle. Institutions may be considered as positive, moral, and human. 1. Those are called positive institutions or precepts which are not founded upon any reasons known to those to whom they are given, or discoverable by them, but which are observed merely because some superior has commanded them.--2. Moral are those, the reasons of which we see, and the duties of which arise out of the nature of the case itself, prior to external command.--3. Human, are generally applied to those inventions of men, or means of honouring God, which are not appointed by him, and which are numerous in the church of Rome, and too many of them in Protestant churches.--Butler's Analogy, p. 214; Doddridge's Lec. lect. 158; Robinson's Claude, 217, vol. i. and 258, vol. ii; Burrough's Two Dis. on Positive Institutions; Bp. Hoadley's Plain Account, p. 3.
Purity of mind, free from any undue bias or principle, Prov. xi. 3. Many hold, that a certain artful sagacity, founded upon knowledge of the world, is the best conductor of every one who would be a successful adventurer in life, and that a strict attention to integrity would lead them into danger and distress. But, in answer to this it is justly observed, 1. That the guidance of integrity is the safest under which it leads us is, upon the whole, the freest from dangers, Prov. iii. 21, &c.--2. It is unquestionably the most honourable; for integrity is the foundation of all that is high in character among mankind, Prov. iv. 8.--3. It is the most conductive to felicity, Phil. iv. 6,7. Prov. iii. 17.--4. Such a character can look forward to eternity without dismay. Rom. ii. 7.
Excess in eating or drinking. This is the general idea of it; but we may observe, that whatever indulgence undermines the health, impairs the senses, inflames the passions, clouds and sullies the reason, perverts the judgment, enslaves the will or in any way disorders or debilitates the faculties, may be ranked under this vice. See article TEMPERANCE.
His interposing for sinners by virtue of the satisfaction he made to divine justice. 1. As to the fact itself, it is evident, from many places of Scripture, that Christ pleads with God in favour of his people, Rom. viii. 34. Heb. vii. 25. 1 John ii. 1.--2. As to the manner of it: the appearance of the high-priest among the Jews, in the presence of God, on the day of atonement, when he offered before him the blood of the sin-offering, is at large referred to by St. Paul, as illustrating the intercession of Christ, Heb. ix. 11,14,22, 26. Feb. x. 19, 21. Christ appears before God with his own body; but whether he intercedes vocally or not cannot be known: though it is most probable, I think, that he does not: however, it is certain that he does not intercede in like manner as when on earth, with prostration of body, cries and tears, which would be quite inconsistent with his state of exaltation and glory; nor as supplicating an angry judge, for peace is made by the blood of the cross; nor as litigating a point in a court of judicature; but his intercession is carried on by showing himself as having done, as their surety, all that law and justice could require, by representing his blood and sacrifice as the ground of his people's acceptance with the Father, Rev. v. 6. John xvii. 24.--3. The end of Christ's intercession is not to remind the Divine Being of any thing which he would otherwise forget, nor to persuade him to any thing which he is not disposed to do; but it may serve to illustrate the holiness and majesty of the Father, and the wisdom and grace of the Son; not to say that it may have other unknown uses with respect to the inhabitants of the invisible world. He is represented, also, as offering up the prayers and praises of his people, which become acceptable to God through him, Rev. viii. 3,4. Heb. xiii. 15. 1 Pet. ii. 5. He there pleads for the conversion of his unconverted ones; and for the consolation, preservation, and glorification of his people, John xvii. 1 John ii. 1,2.--4. Of the properties of Christ's intercession we may observe, 1. That it is authoritative. He intercedes not without right, John xvii. 24. Ps. ii. 8.--2. Wise: he understands the nature of his work, and the wants of his people, John ii. 25.--3. Righteous: for it is founded upon justice and truth, 1 John iii. 5. Heb. vii. 26.--4. Compassionate, Heb. ii. 17. v. 8. Is. lxiii. 9.--5. He is the sole advocate, 1 Tim. ii. 5.--6. It is perpetual, Heb. vii. 25.--7. Efficacious, 1 John ii. 1,2.--8. The use we should make of Christ's intercession is this: 1. We may learn the wonderful love of God to man, Rom. v. 10.--2. The durability and safety of the church, Luke xxii. 31,32. Is. xvii. 24.--3. The ground we have for comfort, Heb. ix. 24. Rom. viii. 34.--4. It should excite us to offer up prayers to God as they are acceptable through him, Rev. viii. 3,4. See Charnock's Works, vol. ii. p. 1109; Flavel's Works, vol. i. p. 72; Doddridge's Lec. vol. ii. p. 294, 8vo. edit. Brown's Nat. and Rev. Rel. p. 348; Berry Street Lec. No. 18; Ridgley's Body of Div. ques. 55.
An ecclesiastical censure, by which the church of Rome forbids the performance of divine service in a kingdom, province, town, &c. This censure has been frequently executed in France, Italy, and Germany; and in the year 1170, Pope Alexander III. put all England under an interdict, forbidding the clergy to perform any part of divine service, except baptizing infants, taking confessions, and giving absolution to dying penitents; but this censure being liable to ill consequences, of promoting libertinism and a neglect of religion, the succeeding popes have very seldom made use of it. There was also an interdict of persons, who were deprived of the benefit of attending on divine service. Particular persons were also anciently interdicted of fire and water, which signifies a banishment for some particular offence: by this censure no person was permitted to receive them, or allow them fire or water; and, being thus wholly deprived of the two necessary elements of life, they were, doubtless under a kind of civil death.
A term often made use of in the religious world; and implies our having a right to claim him as our mediator, surety, advocate, and saviour, and with him all thse spiritual blessings which are purchased and applied by him to those whom he has redeemed. The term, "having a right to claim him," perhaps, is preferable to that often used, "being enabled to claim him," as many have an interest in Christ who are destitute of that assurance which gives them a comfortable sense thereof. Ridgley's Div. 228, 3d. edit. Pike's Cases of Conscience, p. 130.
The name of a formulary, or confession of faith,
obtruded upon the Protestants, after the death of Luther by the emperor Charles
V. when he had defeated their forces. It was so called, because it was only to
take place in the interim, till a general council should decide all the points
in question between the Protestants and Catholics. The occasion of it was this:
The emperor had made choice of three divines, viz. Julius Phlug, bishop of
Naumberg; Michael Helding, titular bishop of Sidon; and John Agricola, preacher
to the elector of Brandenburgh; who drew up a project, consisting of 26
articles, concerning the points of religion in dispute between the Catholics
and Protestants. The controverted points were, the state of Adam before and
after his fall; the redemption of mankind by Jesus Christ; the justification of
sinners; charity and good works; the confidence we ought to have in God; that
our sins are remitted; the church and its true marks, its power, its authority,
and ministers; the pope and bishops; the sacraments; the mass; the
commemoration of saints; their intercession; and prayers for the dead.
The emperor sent this project to the pope for his
approbation, which he refused: whereupon Charles V. published the imperial
constitution, called the Interim, wherein he declared, that "it was his
will, that all his Catholic dominions should, for the future, inviolably
observe the customs, statutes, and ordinances of the universal church; and that
those who had separated themselves from it, should either reunite themselves to
it, or at least conform to this constitution; and that all should quietly
expect the decisions of the general council." This ordinance was published
in the diet of Augsburgh, May 15, 1548; but this device neither pleased the
pope nor the Protestants: the Lutheran preachers openly declared they would not
receive it, alleging that it re-established popery: some chose rather to quit
their chairs and livings than to subscribe it; nor would the duke of Saxony
receive it. Calvin, and several others wrote against it. On the other side, the
emperor was so severe against those who refused to accept it, that he
disfranchised the cities of Magedeburg and Constance for their opposition.
A term made use of to denote the state of the soul between death and the resurrection. From the Scriptures speaking frequently of the dead as sleeping in their graves, many have supposed that the soul sleeps till the resurrection, i. e. is in a state of entire insensibility. But against this opinion, and that the soul, after death, enters immediately into a state of reward or punishment, the following passages seem to be conclusive, Matt. xvii. 3. Luke xxiii. 42. 2 Cor. v. 6. Phil. i. 21. Luke xvi. 22,23. Rev. vi. 9. See articles RESURRECTION, SOUL, and FUTURE STATE; Bishop Law's Appendix to his Theory of Religion; Search's Light of Nature pursued; Bennett's Olam Haneshamoth, or View of the Intermediate State; Archibald Campbell's View of the Middle State; Archdeacon Blackburne's Historical View of the Controversy concerning an Intermediate State, and the separate Existence of the Soul between Death and the general Resurrection; in which last the reader will find a large account of the writings on this subject, from the beginning of the Reformation to almost the present time. See also Doddridge's Lectures. lect. 219.
A gift bestowed on the apostles and primitive Christians, so that in a mixed assembly, consisting of persons of different nations, if one spoke in a language, understood by one part, another could repeat and translate what he said into different languages understood by others, 1 Cor. xii. 10. 1 Cor. xiv. 5,6,13.
Is a word chiefly used in reference to those persons, churches, or societies, who do not allow men to think for themselves, but impose on them articles, creeds, ceremonies, &c. of their own devising. See TOLERATION. Nothing is more abhorrent from the genius of the Christian religion than an intolerant spirit, or an intolerant church. "It has inspired its votaries with a savage ferocity; has plunged the fatal dagger into innocent blood; depopulated towns and kingdoms; overthrown states and empires, and brought down the righteous vengeance of heaven upon a guilty world. The pretence of superior knowledge, sanctity, and authority for its support, is the disgrace of reason, the grief of wisdom, and the paroxysm of folly. To fetter the conscience, is injustice: to ensnare it, is an act of sacrilege; but to torture it, by an attempt to force its feelings, is horrible intolerance; it is the most abandoned violation of all the maxims of religion and morality. Jesus Christ formed a kingdom purely spiritual: the apostles exercised only a spiritual authority under the direction of Jesus Christ; particular churches were united only by faith and love; in all civil affairs they submitted to civil magistracy; and in religious concerns they were governed by the reasoning, advice, and exhortations of their own officers: their censures were only honest reproofs; and their excommunications were only declarations that such offenders, being incorrigible, were no longer accounted members of their communities." Let it ever be remembered, therefore, that no man or men have any authority whatever from Christ over the consciences of others, or to persecute the persons of any whose religious principles agree not with their own. See Lowell's Sermons, ser. 6; Robinson's Claude, vol. ii. p. 227, 229; Saurin's Ser. 3d. vol. p. 30, preface; Locke on Government and toleration.
A disposition of mind unaffected with fear at the approach of danger. Resolution either banishes fear or surmounts it, and is firm on all occasions. Courageis impatient to attack, undertakes boldly, and is not lessened by difficulty. Valour acts with vigour, gives no way to resistance, but pursues an enterprise in spite of opposition. Bravery knows no fear; it runs nobly into danger, and prefers honour to life itself. Intrepidity encounters the greatest points with the utmost coolness, and dares even present death. See COURAGE, FORTITUDE.
In ecclesiastical policy, is the act of conferring any benefice on another. It was customary for princes to make investiture of ecclesiastical benefices, by delivering to the person they had chosen a pastoral staff and a ring. The account of this ceremony may be seen at large in Mosheim's Ecclesiastica History, cent. xi. part ii. chap. 2.
A name of distinction given to the disciples of Osiander, Flacius, Illyricus, Swenkfeld, &c. because they denied the perpetual visibility of the church.
A calling upon God in prayer. It is generally considered as the first part of that necessary duty, and includes, 1. A making mention of one or more of the names or titles of God, indicative of the object to who we pray.--2. A declaration of our desire and design to worship him. And, 3. A desire of his assistance and acceptance, under a sense of our own unworthiness. In the church of Rome, invocation also signifies adoration of, and prayers to the saints. The council of Trent expressly teaches, that the saints who reign with Jesus Christ offer up their prayers to God for men, and condemn those who maintain the contrary doctrine. The Protestants censure and reject this opinion, as contrary to Scripture; deny the truth of the fact; and think it highly unreasonable to suppose that a limited, finite being, should be in a manner omnipresent, and, at one and the same time, hear and attend to the prayers that are offered up to him in England, China, and Peru; and from hence infer, that, if the saints cannot hear their request, it is inconsistent with common sense to address any kind of prayer to them.
See GRACE.
A denomination which appeared in Russia about the year 1666, and assumed this name, which signifies the multitude of the elect. But they were called by their adversaries Rolskolsnika, or the seditious faction. They professed a rigorous zeal for the letter of the Holy Scriptures. They maintained that there is no subordination of rank among the faithful, and that a Christian may kill himself for the love of Christ.
The descendants of Israel, who were at first called Hebrews, by reason of Abraham, who came from the other side of the Euphrates; and afterwards Israelites, from Israel, the father of the twelve patriarchs; and, lastly, Jews, particularly after their return from the captivity of Babylon, because the tribe of Judah was then much stronger and more numerous than the other tribes, and foreigners had scarce any knowledge of this tribe. For the history of this people, see article JEWS.
Those who are not settled over any particular congregation, but go from place to place for the purpose of preaching to, and instructing the ignorant. A great deal has been said against persons of this description; and, it must by acknowledged, that there would not be so much necessity for them, were every minister of his parish to do his duty. But the sad declension of morals in many places; the awful ignorance that prevails as to God and real religion; the little or no exertion of those who are the guides of the people; "villages made up of a train of idle, profligate, and miserable poor, and where the barbarous rhymes in their church-yards inform us that they are all either gone or going to heaven." these things, with a variety of others, form a sufficient reason for every able and benevolent person to step forward, and to do all that he can to enlighten the minds, lessen the miseries, and promote the welfare of his fellow-creatures. A clergyman of the church of England, of respectable talents, very judiciously observes, that, "Notwithstanding the prejudices of mankind, and the indiscretions of some individuals, an itinerant teacher is one of the most honourable and useful characters that can be found upon earth; and there needs no other proof than the experience of the church in all ages, that, when this work is done properly and with perseverance, it forms the grand method of spreading wide, and rendering efficacious religious knowledge, for great reformation and revivals of religion have uniformly been thus effected; and it is especially sanctioned by the example of Christ and his apostles, and recommended as the divine method of spreading the Gospel through the nations of the earth; itinerant preaching having almost always preceded and made way for the solid ministry of regular pastors. But it is a work which requires peculiar talents and dispositions, and a peculiar call in God's providence; and is not rashly and hastily to be ventured upon by every novice who has learned to speak about the Gospel, and has more zeal than knowledge, prudence, humility, or experience. An unblemished character, a disinterested spirit, and exemplary deadness to the world, unaffected humility, deep acquaintance with the human heart, and preparation for enduring the cross not only with boldness, but with meekness, patience, and sweetness of temper, are indispensably necessary for such a service.