Edicts of, were decrees, granted by the kings of
France to the Protestants, for appeasing the troubles occasioned by their
persecution. The first Edict of Pacification was granted by Charles IX. in
January 1562, permitting the free exercise of the reformed religion near all
the cities and towns of the realm. March 19, 1563, the same king granted a
second Edict of Pacification, at Amboise, permitting the free exercise of the
reformed religion in the houses of gentlemen and lords high justiciaries (or
those who had the power of life and death,) to their families and dependents
only; and allowing other Protestants to have their sermons in such towns as
they had them in before the seventh of March; obliging them withal to quit the
churches they had possesed themselves of during the troubles. Another called
the Edict of Lonjumeau, ordering the execution of that of Amboise, was
published March 27, 1558, after a treaty of peace. This pacification was but of
short continuance; for Charles perceiving a general insurrection of the
Huguenots, revoked the said edicts in September, 1568, forbidding the exercise
of the Protestant religion, and commanding all the ministers to depart the
kingdom in fifteen days. But on the eighth of August, 1570, he made peace with
them again, and published an edict on the eleventh, allowing the lords high
justiciaries to have sermons in their houses for all comers, and granting other
Protestants two public exercises in each government. He likewise gave them four
cautionary towns, viz. Rochelle, Montaubon, Cognal, and La Charite, to be
places of security for them during the space of two years.
Nevertheless, in August, 1572, he authorised the
Bartholomew massacre, and at the same time issued a declaration, forbidding the
exercise of the Protestant religion.
Henry III. in April, 1576, made peace with the
Protestants; and the Edict of Pacification was published in parliament, May 14,
permitting them to build churches and have sermons where they pleased. The
Guisian faction, enraged at this general liberty, began the famous league for
defence of the Catholic religion, which became so formidable, that it obliged
the king to assemble the states of the kingdom at Blois, in December, 1576,
where it was enacted that there should be but one religion in France, and that
the Protestant ministers should be all banished. In 1577, the king, to pacify
the troubles, published an edict in parliament, October 8th, granting the same
liberty to the reformed which they had before. However, in July 1585, the
league obliged him to publish another edict, revoking all former edicts granted
to the Protestants, and ordering them to depart the kingdom in six months, or
turn Papists. This edict was followed by more to the same purpose.
Henry IV. coming to the crown, published a
declaration, July 4, 1591, abolishing the edicts against the Protestants. this
edict was verified in the parliament of Chalons; but the troubles prevented the
verification of it in the parliaments of the other provinces; so that the
Protestants had not the free exercise of their religion in any place but where
they were masters, and had banished the Romish religion. In April 1598, the
king published a new Edict of Pacification at Nantz, granting the Protestants
the free exercise of their religion in all places where they had the same in
1596 and 1597, and one exercise in each bailiwick.
This Edict of Nantz was confirmed by Lewis XIII.
in 1610, and by Lewis XIV. 1652. But the latter abolished it entirely in 1685.
See HUGUENOTS, and PERSECUTION.
Those who baptise their children. The word comes from infant, baptism. See BAPTISM.
The religious worship and discipline of Pagans, or the adoration of idols and false gods. The theology of the Pagans according to themselves, as Scxvola and Varrs, was of three sorts. The first of these may well be called fabulous, as treating of the theology and genealogy of their deities, in which they say such things as are unworthy of deity; ascribing to them thefts, murders, adulteries, and all manner of crimes; and therefore this kind of theology is condemned by the wiser sort of heathens as nugatory and scandalous: the writers of this sort of theology were Sancho-niatho, the Phoenician; and of the Grecians, Orpheus, Hesiod, Pherecyde, &c. The second sort, called physic, or natural, was studied and taught by the philosophers, who, rejecting the multiplicity of gods introduced by the poets, brought their theology to a more natural and rational form, and supposed that there was but one Supreme God, which they commonly make to be the sun; at least, an emblem of him, but at too great a distance to mind the affairs of the world, and therefore devised certain demons, which they considered as mediators between the Supreme God and man; and the doctrines of these demons, to which the apostle is thought to allude in 1 Tim. iv. 1. were what the philosophers had a concern with, and who treat of their nature, office, and regard to men; as did Thales, Pythagoras, Plato, and the Stoics. The third part called politic, or civil, was instituted by legislators, statesmen, and politicians: the first among the Roman and Numa Pompilius; this chiefly respected their gods, temples, altars, sacrifices, and rites of worship, and was properly their idolatry, the care of which belonged to the priests; and this was enjoined the common people, to keep them in obedience to the civil state. Thus things continued in the Gentile world, until the light of the Gospel was sent among them: the times before were times of ignorance, as the apostle calls them: they were ignorant of the true God, and of the worship of him; and of the Messiah, and salvation by him. Their state is truly described, Eph. ii. 12. that they were then without Christ; aliens from the commonwealth of Israel; strangers from the covenants of promise: having no hope, and without God in the world; and, consequently, their theology was insufficient for their salvation. The reader will find some admirable reflections on the growth of heathenism among modern Christians, in the 3d volume of the Rev. W. Jones's Works. See HEATHENS, IDOLATRY, POLYTHEISM.
Or PAGOD, a name given by the East Indians to their temples, where they worship their gods.
The Sunday next before Easter, so called from palm branches being strewed on the road by the multitude, when our Saviour made his triumphal entry into Jerusalem.
A philosophical species of idolatry, leading to atheism, in which the universe was considered as the Supreme God. Who was the inventor of this absurd system, is, perhaps, not known, but it was of early origin, and differently modified by different philosophers. Some held the universe to be one immense animal, of which the incorporeal soul was properly their god, and the heavens and the earth the body of that god; whilst others held but one substance, partly active and partly passive, and therefore looked upon the visible universe as the only Numen. The earliest Grecian pantheist of whom we read was Orpheus, who called the world the body of God, and its several parts his members, making the whole universe one divine animal. According to Cudworth, Orpheus and his followers believed in the immaterial soul of the world: therein agreeing with Aristotle, who certainly held that God and matter are co-eternal; and that there is some such union between them, as subsists between the souls and bodies of men. An institution, imbibing sentiments nearly of this kind, was set on foot about eighty or ninety years ago, in this kingdom, by a society of philosophical idolaters, who called themselves Pantheists, because they professed the worship of All Nature as their deity. They had Mr. John Toland for their secretary and chaplain. Their liturgy was in Latin: an English translation was published in 1751, from which the following sentiments are extracted:--"The ethereal fire environs all things, and is therefore supreme. The aether is a reviving fire: it rules all things, it disposes all things. In it is soul, mind, prudence. This fire is Horace's particle of divine breath, and Virgil's inwardly nourishing spirit. All things are comprised in an intelligent nature." This force they call the soul of the world; as also, a mind of perfect wisdom, and, consequently, God. Vanini the Italian philosopher, was nearly of this opinion: his god was nature. Some very learned and excellent remarks are made on this error by Mr. Boyle, in his discourse on the vulgarly received notion of nature. See Jones of Nayland's Works, vol. ix. p. 50. and article SPINOSISM.
The whole sum or body of divinity.
One who adheres to the communion of the pope and church of Rome. See POPE, and POPERY.
A fable or allegorical instruction, founded on something read or apparent in nature or history, from which a moral is drawn, by comparing it with something in which the people are more immediately concerned: such are the parables of Dives and Lazarus, or the prodigal son, of the ten virgins, &c. Dr. Blair observes, that "of parables, which form a part of allegory, the prophetical writings are full; and if to us they sometimes appear obscure, we must remember, that, in those early times, it was universally the mode throughout all the eastern nations, to convey sacred truths under some mysterious figures and representations."
An advocate or comforter; generally applied to the third person in the Trinity, John xv. 26.
The garden of Eden, in which Adam and Eve were placed. It is also used to denote heaven, Luke xxiii. 44. As to the terrestrial paradise, there have been many inquiries about its situation. It has been placed in the third heaven, in the orb of the moon, in the moon itself, in the middle region of the air, above the earth, under the earth, in the place possessed by the Caspian sea, and under the arctic pole. The learned Huetius places it upon the river that is produced by the conjunction of the Tigris and Euphrates, now called the river of the Arabs, between this conjunction, and the division made by the same river before it falls into the Persian sea. Other geographers have placed it in Armenia, between the sources of the Tigris, the Euphrates, the Araxes, and the Phasis, which they suppose to be the four rivers described by Moses. But concerning the exact place, we must necessarily be very uncertain, if, indeed, it can be thought at all to exist at present, considering the many changes which have taken place on the surface of the earth since the creation. See MAN.
An explanation of some text in clearer and more ample terms, wherein more regard is had to an author's meaning than his words. See COMMENTARY.
The act of forgiving an offender, or removing
the guilt of sin, that the punishment due to it may not be inflicted. Of the
nature of pardon it may be observed, that the Scripture represents it by
various phrases: a lifting up, or taking away, Psal. xxxii. 1; a covering of
it, Psal. lxxxv. 2; a non-imputation of it, Ps. xxxii. 2. a blotting it out,
Ps. xliii. 25; a non-remembrance of it, Heb. viii. 12. Is. xliii. 25.--1. It is
an act of free grace, Ps. li. 1. Isa. xliii. 25.--2. A point of justice, God
having received satisfaction by the blood of Christ, 1 John i. 9.--3. A
complete act, a forgiveness of all the sins of his people, 1 John i. 7. Psal.
ciii. 2, 3.--4. An act that never will be repealed, Mic. vii. 19. The author or
cause of pardon is not any creature, angel, or man; but God. Ministers are said
to remit sin declaratively, but not authoriatively; that is, they preach and
declare that there is remission of sins in Christ; but to pretend to absolve
men is the height of blasphemy, 1 Thess. ii. 4. Rev. xiii. 5,6. See ABSOLUTION,
INDULGENCES. There is nothing that man has, or can do, by which pardon can be
procured: wealth cannot buy pardon, Prov. xi. 4; human works or righteousness
cannot merit it, Rom. xi. 6; nor can water baptism wash away sin. It is the
prerogative of God alone to forgive, Mark ii. 7; the first cause of which is
his own sovereign grace and mercy, Eph. i. 7. The meritorious cause is the
blood of Christ, Heb. ix. 14. 1 John i. 7. Pardon of sin and justification are
considered by some as the same thing: and it must be confessed that there is a
close connexion; in many parts they agree, and it is without doubt that every
sinner who shall be found pardoned at the great day, will likewise be
justified; yet they have been distinguished thus: 1. An innocent person, when
falsely accused and acquitted, is justified, but not pardoned; and a criminal
may be pardoned, though he cannot be justified or declared innocent. Pardon is
of men that are sinners, and who remain such, though pardoned sinners; but
justification is a pronouncing persons righteous, as if they had never
sinned.--2. Pardon frees from punishment, but does not entitle to everlasting
life; but justification does, Rom. v. If we were only pardoned, we should,
indeed, escape the pains of hell, but could have no claim to the joys of
heaven; for these are more than the most perfect works of man could merit;
therefore they must be what the Scriptures declare--"the gift of
God."
After all, however, though these two may be
distinguished, yet they cannot be separated; and, in reality, one is not prior
to the other; for he that is pardoned by the death of Christ, is at the same
time justified by his life, Rom. v. 10. Acts xiii. 38, 39. See GRACE, MERCY.
Charnock's works, Vol. ii. p. 101; Gill's Body of Div. art. Pardon ; Owen on
Psalm cxxx; Hervey's Works. vol. ii. p. 352.
A name appropriated to immediate progenitors, as father and mother. The duties of parents to children relate to their health, their maintenance, their education, and morals. Many rules have been delivered respecting the health of children, which cannot be inserted here; yet we shall just observe, that if a parent wishes to see his progeny healthy, he must not indulge them in every thing their little appetites desire; not give them too much sleep, nor ever give them strong liquors. He must accustom them to industry and moderate exercise. Their food and clothing should be rather light. They should go to rest soon, and rise early; and, above all, should, if possible, be inspired with a love of cleanliness. As to their maintenance, it is the parent's duty to provide every thing for them that is necessary until they be capable of providing for themselves. They, therefore, who live in habits of idleness, desert their families, or by their negligent conduct reduce them to a state of indigence and distress, are violating the law of nature and of revelation, 1 Tim. v. 8. In respect to their education and morals, great care should be taken. As it relates to the present life, habits of courage, application, trade, prudence, labour, justice, contentment, temperance, truth, benevolence, &c. should be formed. Their capacities, age, temper, strength, inclination, should be consulted, and advice given suitable to these. As it relates to a future life, their minds should be informed as to the being of God, his perfections, glory, and the mode of salvation by Jesus Christ. They should be catechised; allured to a cheerful attendance on divine worship; instructed in the Scriptures; kept from bad company; prayed with and for; and, above all, a good example set them, Prov. xxii. 6. Eph. vi. 1,2. Nothing can be more criminal than the conduct of some parents in the inferior classes of the community, who never restrain the desires and passions of their children, suffer them to live in idleness, dishonesty, and profanation of the Lord's day, the consequence of which is often an ignominious end. So, among the great, permitting their children to spend their time and their money as they please, indulging them in perpetual public diversion, and setting before them awful examples of gambling, indolence, blasphemy, drinking, and almost every other vice; what is this but ruining their children, and "bequeathing to posterity a nuisance?" But, while we would call upon parents to exercise their authority, it must not be understood that children are to be entirely at their disposal under all circumstances, especially when they begin to think for themselves. Though a parent has a right over his children, yet he is not to be a domestic tyrant, consulting his own will and passions in preference to their interest. In fact, his right over them is at an end when he goes beyond his duty to them. "For parents," as Mr. Paley observes, "have no natural right over the lives of their children, as was absurdly allowed to Roman fathers; nor any to exercise unprofitable severities; nor to command the commission of crimes: for these rights can never be wanted for the purposes of a parent's duty. Nor have parents any right to sell their children into slavery; to shut up daughters and younger sons in nunneries and monasteries, in order to preserve entire the estate and dignity of the family; or to use any arts, either of kindness or unkindness, to induce them to make choice of this way of life themselves; or in countries where the clergy are prohibited from marriage, to put sons into the church for the same end, who are never likely to do or receive any good in it sufficient to compensate for this sacrifice; nor to urge children to marriages from which they are averse, with the view of exalting or enriching the family, or for the sake of connecting estates, parties, or interests; nor to oppose a marriage in which the child would probably find his happiness, from a motive of pride or avarice, of family hostility or personal pique." Paley's Moral Philosophy, vol. i. p. 345 to 370; Stennett's Discourses on Domestic Duties, dis. 5; Beattie's Elements of Moral Science, vol. ii. p. 139, 148; Doddridge's Lectures, lec. 74; Saurin's Sermons, Robinson's Translation, vol. v. ser. 1; Searl's Christian Parent.
Covetousness. See COVETOUSNESS.
(persona ecclesiae) one that hath full possession of all the rights of a parochial church. He is called parson (persona) because by his person the church, which is an invisible body, is represented, and he is in himself a body corporate, in order to protect and defend the rights of the church, which he personates. There are three ranks of clergymen below that of a dignitary, viz, parson, vicar, and curate. Parson is the first, meaning a rector, or he who receives the great tithes of a benefice. Clergymen may imply any person ordained to serve at the altar. Parsons are always priests, whereas clergymen are only deacons. See CLERGY, CURATE.
A denomination which arose in the twelfth century, known also by the name of the Circumcised. their distinguishing tenets were these, 1. That the observation of the law of Moses in every thing except the offering of sacrifices was obligatory upon Christians. In consequence of which, they circumcised their followers, abstained from those meats the use of which was prohibited under the Mosaic aeconomy, and celebrated the Jewish sabbath.--2. That Christ was no more than the first and purest creature of God. This denomination had the utmost aversion to the doctrine and discipline of the church of Rome.
A branch of the Montanists. They held, that in order to be saved, it was necessary to observe a perpetual silence; wherefore they kept their finger constantly on their mouth, and dared not open it, even to say their prayers. Their name is derived from the Greek, a nail, and a nostril, because, when they put their finger to their mouth, they touched their nose.
See OBEDIENCE, and SUFFERINGS OF CHRIST.
Among the mystic divines, is a total suspension, or ligature of the intellectual faculties, in virtue whereof the soul remains of itself, and, as to its own power, impotent with regard to the producing of any effects. The passive state, according to Fenelon, is only passive in the same sense as contemplation; i.e. it does not exclude peaceable disinterested acts, but only unquiet ones, or such as tend to our own interest. In the passive state the soul has not properly any activity, any sensation of its own. It is a mere inflexibility of the soul, to which the feeblest impulse of grace gives motion. See MYSTIC.
In its general import, signifies every feeling
of the mind occasioned by an extrinsic cause. It is used to describe a violent
commotion or agitation of the mind; emotion, zeal, ardour, or of ease wherein a
man can conquer his desires, or hold them in subjection. 1. As to the number of
the passions, Le Brun makes them about twenty, 1. Attention; 2. admiration; 3.
astonishment; 4. veneration; 5. rapture; 6. Joy, with tranquillity; 7. desire;
8. laughter; 9. acute pain; 10. pains, simply bodily; 11. sadness; 12. weeping;
13. compassion; 14. scorn; 15. horror; 16. terror or fright; 17. anger; 18.
hatred; 19. jealousy; 20. despair. All these may be represented on canvass by
the pencil. Some make their number greater, adding aversion, love, emulation,
&c. &c. these, however, may be considered as included in the above
list. They are divided by some into public and private; proper and improper;
social and selfish passions.--2. The original of the passions are from
impressions on the senses; from the operations of reason, by which good or evil
are foreseen; and form the recollections of memory.--3. The objects of the
passions are mostly things sensible, on account of their near alliance to the
body: but objects of a spiritual nature also, though invisible, have a tendency
to excite the passions; such as the love of God, heaven, hell, eternity,
&c.--4. As to the innocency of the passions; in themselves they are neither
good nor evil, but according to the good or ill use that is made of them, and
the degrees to which they rise.--5. The usefulness of the passions is
considerable, and were given us for a kind of spring or elasticity to correct
the natural sluggishness of the corporeal part. They gave birth to poetry,
science, painting, music, and all the polite arts, which minister to pleasure;
nor are they less serviceable in the cause of religion and
truth.--"They," says Dr. Watts, "when sanctified, set the powers
of the understanding at work in the search of divine truth and religious duty;
they keep the soul fixed to divine things; render the duties of holiness much
easier, and temptations to sin much weaker; and render us more like Christ, and
fitter for his presence and enjoyment in heaven."--6. As to the regulation
of the passions: to know whether they are under due restraints, and directed to
proper objects, we must inquire whether they influence our opinions; run before
the understanding; engaged in trifling, and neglectful of important objects;
express themselves in an indecent manner; and whether they disorder our
conduct. If this be the case, they are out of their due bounds, and will become
sources of trial rather than instruments of good. To have them properly regulated
we should possess knowledge of our duty, take God's word for our rule, be much
in prayer and dependence on the Divine Being.--7. Lastly, we should study the
passions. To examine them accurately, indeed, requires much skill, patience,
observation, and judgment; but to form any proper idea of the human mind, and
its various operations; to detect the errors that arise from heated temperament
and intellectual excess; to know how to touch their various strings, and to
direct and employ them in the best of all services; I say, to accomplish these
ends, the study of the passions is of the greatest consequence.
"Amidst the numerous branches of
knowledge," says Mr. Cogan, "which claim the attention of the human
mind, no one can be more important than this. Whatever most intimately concerns
ourselves must be of the first moment. An attention, therefore, to the workings
of our own minds; tracing the power which external objects have over us;
discovering the nature of our emotions and affections; and comprehending the
reason of our being affected in a particular manner, must have a direct
influence upon our pursuits, our characters, and our happiness. It may with
justice be advanced, that the happiness of ourselves in this department is of
much greater utility than abstuser speculations concerning the nature of the
human soul, or even the most accurate knowledge of its intellectual powers; for
it is according as the passions and affections are excited and directed towards
the objects investigated by our intellectual natures that we become useful to
ourselves or others: that we rise into respectability, or sink into contempt;
that we diffuse or enjoy happiness, diffuse or suffer misery. An accurate
analysis of these passions and affections, therefore, is to the moralist what
the science of anatomy is to the surgeon. It constitutes the first principles
of rational practice; it is, in a moral view, the anatomy of the heart; it
discovers why it beats, and how it beats; indicates appearances in a sound and
healthy state; detects diseases with their causes, and it is infinitely more
fortunate in the power it communicates of applying suitable remedies."
See Hutcheson, Watts, Le Brun, Cogan, and Davan
on the Passions; Grove's Moral Philosophy, vol. i. ch. 7; Reid's Active Powers
of Man; Fordyce's Elements of Mor. Phil. Burke on the Sublime and Beautiful, p.
50.
A solemn festival of the Jews, instituted in commemoration of their coming out of Egypt; because, the night before their departure, the destroying angel, who put to death the first-born of the Egyptians, passed over the houses of the Hebrews, without entering therein; because they were marked with the blood of the lamb, which was killed the evening before, and which for this reason was called the paschal lamb. See Exod. xii. Brown's Dict. article FEAST; and Mc'Ewen on the Types. p. 172.
Literally a shepherd; figuratively a stated
minister appointed to watch over and instruct a congregation. Of the
qualifications of ministers we have already made some remarks under that
article; but the following, taken from the works of a spiritual and useful
writer, we hope, will not be found superfluous. Jesus Christ's description of
an evangelical pastor, Matt. xxiv. 45, includes two things, faithfulness and
prudence. "If a minister be faithful, he deceives not others; and if he be
prudent, he is not apt to be deceived himself. His prudence suffers not
deceivers easily to impose upon him; and his faithfulness will not suffer him
knowingly to impose upon his people. His prudence will enable him to discern,
and his faithfulness oblige him to distribute wholesome food to his flock. But
more particularly,
1. "Ministerial faithfulness includes pure
and spiritual aims and intentions for God, Phil. ii. 20, 21.--2. Personal
sincerity, or integrity of heart, Neh. ix. 8. 1 Cor. ii. 12.--3. Diligence in
the discharge of duty, Matt. xxv. 21. 1 Tim. v. 21.--5. An unshaken constancy
and perseverance to the end, Rev. ii. 10. But the Lord's servants must not only
be faithful, but prudent, discreet, and wise. Fidelity and honesty make a good
Christian; but the addition of prudence to fidelity makes a good steward.
Faithfulness will fix the eye upon the right end; but it is prudence must
direct to the proper means of attaining it. The use of prudence to a minister
is unspeakably great: it not only gives clearness and perspicacity to the mind,
by freeing it from passions and corporeal impressions, enabling it thereby to
apprehend what is best to be done, but enables it in its deliberations about
the means to make choice of the most apt and proper; and directs the
application of them in the fittest season, without precipitation by too much
haste, or hazard by too tedious delay.
2. "Prudence will direct us to lay a good
foundation of knowledge in our people's souls by catechising and instructing
them in the principles of Christianity, without which we labour in vain.--2.
Ministerial prudence discovers itself in the choice of such subjects as the
needs of our people's souls do most require and call for.--3. It will not only
direct us in the choice of our subjects, but of the language, too, in which we
dress and deliver them to our people.--4. It will show us of what great use our
own affections are for the moving of others; and will therefore advise us,
that, if ever we expect the truths we preach should operate upon the hearts of
others, we must first have them impressed on our own hearts, Phil. iii. 18.--5.
It will direct us to be careful, by the strictness and gravity of our
deportment, to maintain our esteem in the consciences of our people.--6. It
will excite us to seek a blessing from God upon our studies and labours, as
knowing all our ministerial success entirely depends thereupon." 1 Cor.
iii. 7. See Flavel's Character of an Evangelical Pastor, in the second Volume
of his Works, p. 763, fol. ed. and books under article MINISTRY.
That calm and unruffled temper with which a good
man bears the evils of life. "Patience," says an eminent writer,
"is apt to be ranked by many among the more humble and obscure virtues,
belonging chiefly to those who grown on a sick bed, or who languish in a
prison; but in every circumstance of life no virtue is more important both to
duty and to happiness. It is not confined to a situation of continued
adversity: it principally, indeed, regards the disagreeable circumstances which
are apt to occur; but prosperity cannot be enjoyed, any more than adversity
supported without it. It must enter into the temper, and form the habit of the
soul, if we would pass through the world with tranquillity and honour."
"Christian patience," says Mason, "is essentially different from
insensibility, whether natural, artificial, or acquired. This, indeed,
sometimes passes for patience, though it be in reality quite another thing; for
patience signifies suffering. Now if you inflict ever so much pain on the body of
another, if he is not sensible of it, it is no pain to him; he suffers nothing;
consequently calmness under it is no patience. This insensibility is sometimes
natural. Some, in the native temperament of their mind and body are much less
susceptible of pain than others are.--There are different degrees of
insensibility in men, both in their animal and mental frame; so that the same
event may be a great exercise of patience to one man, which is none at all to
another, as the latter feels little or no pain from that wound inflicted on the
body or mind which gives the most exquisite anguish to the former. Again; there
is an artificial insensibility: such as is procured by opiates, which blunt the
edge of pain; and there is an acquired insensibility; or that which is attained
by the force of principles strongly inculcated, or by long custom. Such was the
apathy of the Stoics, who obstinately maintained that pain was no evil, and
therefore bore it with amazing firmness, which, however, was very different
from the virtue of Christian patience, as appears from the principles from
which they respectively proceeded; the one springing from pride, the other from
humility." Christian patience, then, is something different from all
these. "It is not a careless indolence, a stupid insensibility, mechanical
bravery, constitutional fortitude, a daring stoutness of spirit, resulting from
fatalism, philosophy, or pride:--it is derived from a divine agency, nourished
by heavenly truth, and guided by Scriptural rules."
"Patience," says Mr. Jay, "must be
displayed under provocations. Our opinions, reputation, connexions, offices,
business, render us widely vulnerable. the characters of men are various: their
pursuits and their interests perpetually clash: some try us by their ignorance;
some by their folly; some by their perverseness; some by their malice. Here,
then, is an opportunity for the triumph of patience.--We are very susceptive of
irritation; anger is eloquent; revenge is sweet: but to stand calm and
collected; to suspend the blow which passion was urgent to strike; to drive the
reasons of clemency as far as they will go; to bring forward fairly in view the
circumstances of mitigation: to distinguish between surprise and deliberation,
infirmity and crime; or if infliction be deemed necessary, to leave God to be
both the judge and the executioner; this a Christian should labour after: his
peace requires it. People love to sing the passionate; they who are easily
provoked, commit their repose to the keeping of their enemies; they lie down at
their feet, and invite them to strike. the man of temper places himself beyond
vexatious interruption. 'He that hath no rule over his own spirit, is like a
city that is broken down, and without walls,' into which enter over the ruins serpents,
vagrants, thieves, enemies; while the man who in patience possesses his soul,
has the command of himself, places a defence all around him, and forbids the
entrance of such unwelcome company to offend or discompose. His wisdom requires
it. 'He that is slow to anger is of great understanding; but he that is hasty
of spirit, exalteth folly.' Wisdom gives us large, various, comprehensive views
of things; the very exercise operates as a diversion, affords the mind time to
cool, and furnishes numberless circumstances tending to soften severity. His
dignity requires it. 'It is the glory of a man to pass by a transgression.' The
man provoked to revenge is conquered, and loses the glory of the struggle;
while he who forbears comes off victor, crowned with no common laurels. A flood
assails a rock, and rolls off unable to make an impression; while straws and
boughs are borne off in triumph, carried down the stream, driven and tossed.
Examples require it. What provocations had Joseph received from his brethren?
but he scarcely mentions the crime: so eager is he to announce the pardon.
David says, 'They rewarded me evil for good; but as for me, when they were
sick, my clothing was sackcloth.' Stephen, dying under a shower of stones,
prays for his enemies: 'Lord, lay not this sin to their charge.' But a greater
than Joseph, or David, or Stephen, is here. go to the foot of the cross, and
behold Jesus suffering for us. Every thing conspired to render the provocation
heinous; the nature of the offence, the meanness and obligation of the
offenders, the righteousness of his cause, the grandeur of his person; and all
these seemed to call for vengeance. The creatures were eager to punish. Peter
drew his sword; the sun resolved to shine on such criminals no longer; the rocks
asked to crush them; the earth trembles under the sinful load; the very dead
cannot remain in their graves. He suffers them all to testify their sympathy,
but forbids their revenge; and, lest the Judge of all should pour forth his
fury, he cries, 'Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do!'--2.
Patience is to be displayed in suffering affliction. This is another field in
which patience gathers glory. Affliction comes to exercise our patience, and to
distinguish it. 'The trial of your faith worketh patience,' not only in
consequence of the divine blessing, but by the natural operation of things; use
makes perfect; the yoke is rendered easy by being worn, and those parts of the
body which are most in action are the most strong and solid; and, therefore, we
are not to excuse improper dispositions under affliction, by saying,'It was so
trying, who could help it?' This is to justify impatience by what God sends on
purpose to make you patient.--3. Patience is to be exercised under delays. We
as naturally pursue a desired good as we shun an apprehended evil: the want of
such a good is as grievous as the pressure of such an evil; and an ability to
bear the one is as needful a qualification as the fortitude by which we endure
the other. It therefore, equally belongs to patience to wait, as to suffer. God
does not always immediately indulge us with an answer to our prayers. He hears,
indeed, as soon as we knock; but he does not open the door: to stand there
resolved not to go without a blessing, requires patience; and patience cries,
'Wait on the Lord; be of good courage, and he shall strengthen thine heart:
wait, I say, on the Lord.'
We have, however, the most powerful motives to
excite us to the attainment of this grace. 1. God is a God of patience, Rom.
xv. 5.--2. It is enjoined by the Gospel, Rom. xii. 12. Luke xxi. 19.--3. The
present state of man renders the practice of it absolutely necessary, Heb. x.
36.--4. The manifold inconvenience of impatience is a strong motive, John iv.
Psal. cvi.--5. Eminent examples of it, Heb. xii.2. Heb. vi. 12. Job i. 22.--6.
Reflect that all our trials will terminate in triumph, James v. 7, 8. Rom. ii.
7. Barrow's works, vol. iii. ser. 10; Jay's Sermons, ser. 2. vol. i.; Mason's
christian Morals, vol. i. ser. 3; Blair's Sermons, vol. iii. ser. 11; Bishop
Horne's Discourses, vol. ii. ser. 10; Bishop Hopkin's Death Disarmed, p. i.
120.
Is his long suffering or forbearance. He is called the God of patience, not only because he is the author and object of the grace of patience, but because he is patient or long suffering in himself, and towards his creatures. It is not, indeed, to be considered as a quality, accident, passion, or affection in God as in creatures, but belongs to the very nature and essence of God, and springs from his goodness and mercy, Rom. ii. 4. It is said to be exercised towards his chosen people, 2 Peter iii. 9. Rom. iii. 25. Isa. xxx. 18. 1 Tim. i. 16. and towards the ungodly, Rom. ii. 4. Eccl. viii. 11. The end of his forbearance to the wicked, is, that they may be without excuse; to make his power and goodness visible; and partly for the sake of his own people, Gen. xviii. 32. Rev. vi. 11. 2 Pet. iii. 9. His patience is manifested by giving warnings of judgments before he executes them, Hos. vi. 5. Amos i. 1. 2 Pet. ii. 5. In long delaying his judgments, Eccl. viii. 11. In often mixing mercy with them. There are many instances of his patience recorded in the Scriptures; with the old world, Gen. vi. 3; the inhabitants of Sodom, Gen. xviii; in Pharaoh, Exod. v; in the people of Israel in the wilderness, Acts xiii. 18; in the Amorites and Cannaanites, Gen. xv. 15. Lev. xviii. 28. in the Gentile world. Acts xvii. 30; in fruitless professors, Luke xiii. 6, 9; in Antichrist, Rev. ii. 21. xiii. 6. xviii. 8. See Charnock's Works, vol. i. p. 780; Gill's Body of Divinity, vol. i. p. 130; Saurin's Sermon's vol. i. ser. 10 and 11, 148, 149; Tillotson's Sermons.
Heads of families; a name applied chiefly to
those who lived before Moses, who were both priests and princes, without
peculiar places fitted for worship, Acts. ii. 29. vii. 8,9. Heb. vii. 4.
Patriarchs among Christians, are ecclesiastical
dignitaries, or bishops, so called from their paternal authority in the church.
The power of patriarchs was not the same in all, but differed according to the
different customs of countries, or the pleasures of kings and councils. Thus
the patriarch of Constantinople grew to be a patriarch over the patriarchs of
Ephesus and Caesarea, and was called the (Ecumenical and Universal Patriarch;
and the patriarch of Alexandria had some prerogatives which no other patriarch
but himself enjoyed; such as the right of consecrating and approving of every
single bishop under his jurisdiction. The patriarchate has ever been esteemed
the supreme dignity in the church: the bishop had only under him the territory
of the city of which he was bishop; the metropolital superintended a province,
and had for suffragans the bishops of his province; the primate was the chief
of what was then called a diocess, and had several metropolitans under him; and
the patriarch had under him several diocesses, composing one exarchate, and the
primates themselves were under him. Usher, Pagi, De Marca, and Morinus,
attribute the establishment of the grand patriarchates to the apostles
themselves, who, in their opinion, according to the description of the world
then given by geographers, pitched on three principal cities in the three parts
of the known world, viz. Rome in Europe, Antioch in Asia, and Alexandria in
Africa: and thus formed a trinity of patriarchs. Others maintain, that the name
patriarch was unknown at the time of the council of Nice; and that for a long
time afterwards patriarchs and primates were confounded together, as being all
equally chiefs of diocesses, and equally superior to metropolitans, who were
only chiefs of provinces. Hence Socrates gives the title patriarch to all the
chiefs of diocesses, and reckons ten of them. In deed, it does not appear that
the dignity of patriarch was appropriated to the five grand sees of Rome,
Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem, till after the council of
Chalcedon, in 451; for when the council of Nice regulated the limits and
prerogatives of the three patriarchs of Rome, Antioch, and Alexandria, it did
not give them the title of patriarchs, though it allowed them the pre-eminence
and privileges thereof: thus when the council of Constantinople adjudged the
second place to the bishop of Constantinople, who, till then, was only a
suffragan of Heraclea, it said nothing of the patriarchate. Nor is the term
patriarch found in the decree of the council of Chalcedon, whereby the fifth
place is assigned to the bishop of Jerusalem; nor did these five patriarchs
govern all the churches.
There were besides many independent chiefs of
diocesses, who, far from owning the jurisdiction of the grand patriarchs,
called themselves patriarchs, such as that of Aquileia; nor was Carthage ever
subject to the patriarch of Alexandra. Mosheim (Eccles. Hist. vol. i. p. 284.)
imagines that the bishops who enjoyed a certain degree of pre-eminence over the
rest of their order, were distinguished by the Jewish title of patriarchs in
the fourth century. The authority of the patriarchs gradually increased till
about the close of the fifth century: all affairs of moment within the compass
of their patriarchates came before them, either at first hand, or by appeals
from the metropolitans. They consecrated bishops; assembled yearly in council
the clergy of their respective districts; pronounced a decisive judgment in
those cases where accusations were brought against bishops; and appointed
vicars or deputies, clothed with their authority, for the preservation of order
and tranquility in the remoter provinces. In short, nothing was done without
consulting them, and their decrees were executed with the same regularity and
respect as those of the princes.
It deserves to be remarked, however, that the
authority of the patriarchs was not acknowledged through all the provinces
without exception. Several districts, both in the eastern and western empires,
were exempted from their jurisdiction. The Latin church had no patriarchs till
the sixth century; and the churches of Gaul, Britain, &c. were never
subject to the authority of the patriarch of Rome, whose authority only
extended to the suburbicary provinces. There was no primacy, no exarchate, nor
patriarchate, owned here; but the bishops, with the metropolitans governed the
church in common. Indeed, after the name patriarch became frequent in the West,
it was attributed to the bishop of Bourges and Lyons; but it was only in the
first signification, viz. as heads of diocesses. Du Cange says, that there have
been some abbots who have borne the title of patriarchs.
Ancient sectaries who disturbed the peace of the church in the beginning of the third century; thus called from their founder Patricius, preceptor of a Marchionite called Symmachus. His distinguishing tenet was, that the substance of the flesh is not the work of God, but that of the devil; on which account his adherents bore an implacable hatred to their own flesh, which sometimes carried them so far as to kill themselves.
A sect that appeared about the latter end of the second century; so called from their ascribing the passion or sufferings of Christ to the Father; for they asserted the unity of God in such a manner as to destroy all distinctions of persons, and to make the Father and Son precisely the same; in which they were followed by the Sabellians and others. The author and head of the Patripassians was Praxias, a philosopher of Phrygia, in Asia.
Or ADVOWSON, a sort of incorporeal hereditament, consisting in the right of presentation to a church, or ecclesiastical benefice. Advowson signifies the taking into protection, and therefore is synonymous with patronage; and he who has the right of advowson is called the patron of the church.
A sect so called from their founder, Paulus Samosatenus, a native of Samosata, elected bishop of Antioch, in 262. His doctrine seems to have amounted to this: that the Son and the Holy Ghost exist in God in the same manner as the faculties of reason and activity do in man; that Christ was born a mere man; but that the reason or wisdom of the Father descended into him, and by him wrought miracles upon earth, and instructed the nations, and, finally, that on account of this union of the divine Word with the man Jesus, Christ might though improperly, be called God. It is also said that he did not baptise in the name of the Father and the Son, &c. for which reason the council of Nice ordered those baptised by him to be re-baptised. Being condemned by Dionysius Alexandrinus in a council, he abjured his errors to avoid deposition; but soon after he resumed them, and was actually deposed by another council in 269. He may be considered as the father of the modern Socinians; and his errors are severely condemned by the council of Nice, whose creed differs a little from that now used under the same name in the church of England. The creed agreed upon by the Nicene fathers with a view to the errors of Paulus Samosatenus concludes thus: "But those who say there was a time when he was not, and that he was not before he was born, the catholic and apostolic church anathematize."
A branch of the ancient Manichees; so called
from their founder, one Paulus, an Armenian, in the seventh century, who, with
his brother John, both of Samosata, formed this sect; though others are of
opinion that they were thus called from another Paul, an Armenian by birth, who
lived under the reign of Justinian II. In the seventh century, a zealot, called
Constantine, revived this drooping sect, which had suffered much from the
violence of its adversaries, and was ready to expire under the severity of the
imperial edicts, and that zeal with which they were carried into execution. The
Paulicians, however, by their number, and the countenance of the emperor
Nicephorus, became formidable to all the East. But the cruel rage of
persecution, which had for some years been suspended, broke forth with
redoubled violence under the reigns of Michael Curopalates, and Leo the Armenian,
who inflicted capital punishment on such of the Paulicians as refused to return
into the bosom of the church. The empress Theodora, tutoress of the emperor
Michael, in 845, would oblige them either to be converted, or to quit the
empire; upon which several of them were put to death, and more retired among
the Saracens; but they were neither all exterminated nor banished.
Upon this they entered into a league with the
Saracens, and, choosing for their chief an officer of the greatest resolution
and valour, whose name was Carbeus, they declared against the Greeks a war,
which was carried on for fifty years with the greatest vehemence and fury.
During these commotions, some Paulicians, towards the conclusion of this
century, spread abroad their doctrines among the Bulgarians: many of them,
either of a principle of zeal for the propagation of their opinions, or from a
natural desire of flying from the persecution which they suffered under the
Grecian yoke, retired about the close of the eleventh century from Bulgaria and
Thrace, and formed settlements in other countries. Their first migration was
into Italy; whence, in process of time, they sent colonies into almost all the
other provinces of Europe, and formed gradually a considerable number of
religious assemblies, who adhered to their doctrine, and who were afterwards
persecuted with the utmost vehemence by the Roman pontiffs. In Italy they were
called Patarmi, from a certain place called Pataria, being a part of the city
of Milan where they held their assemblies: and Gathari, or Gazari, from
Gazaria, or the Lesser Tartary. In France they were called Albigenses, though
their faith differed widely from that of Albigenses, whom Protestant writers
generally vindicate (see Albigenses.) The first religious assembly the
Paulicians had formed in Europe, is said to have been discovered at Orleans in
1017, under the reign of Robert, when many of them were condemned to be burnt
alive. The ancient Paulicians, according to Photius, expressed the utmost
abhorrence of Manes and his doctrine. The Greek writers comprise their errors
under the six following particulars: 1. They denied that this inferior and
visible world is the production of the Supreme Being; and they distinguish the
Creator of the world and of human bodies from the Most High God who dwells in
the heavens; and hence some have been led to conceive that they were a branch
of the Gnostics rather than of the Manicheans.--2. They treated contemptuously
the Virgin Mary, or, according to the usual manner of speaking among the
Greeks, they refused to adore and worship her.--3. They refused to celebrate
the institution of the Lord's supper.--4. They loaded the cross of Christ with
contempt and reproach, by which we are only to understand that they refused to
follow the absurd and superstitious practice of the Greeks, who paid to the
pretended wood of the cross a certain sort of religious homage.--5. They
rejected, after the example of the greatest part of the Gnostics, the books of
the Old Testament; and looked upon the writers of that sacred history as
inspired by the Creator of this world, and not by the Supreme God.--6. They
excluded presbyters and elders from all part in the administration of the
church.
That state of mind in which persons are exposed to no open violence to interrupt their tranquillity. 1. Social peace is mutual agreement one with another, whereby we forbear injuring one another, Psalm xxxiv. 14. Psalm cxxxii.--2. Ecclesiastical peace is freedom from contentions, and rest from persecutions, Isa. xi. 13. Isaiah xxxii. 17. Rev. xii. 14.--3. Spiritual peace is deliverance from sin, by which we were at enmity with God, Rom. v. 1; the result of which is peace, in the conscience, Heb. x. 22. This peace is the gift of God through Jesus Christ, 2 Thess. iii. 16. It is a blessing of great importance, Psalm cxix. 165. It is denominated perfect, Isaiah xxvi. 3. inexpressible, Phil. iv. 7. permanent, Job xxxiv. 22. John xvi. 22. eternal, Isaiah lvii. 2. Heb. iv. 9. See HAPPINESS.
A sect who appeared about the end of the fourth
century. They maintained the following doctrines: 1. That Adam was by nature
mortal, and, whether he had sinned or not, would certainly have died.--2. That
the consequences of Adam's sin were confined to his own person.--3. That
new-born infants are in the same situation with Adam before the fall.--4. That
the law qualified men for the kingdom of heaven, and was founded upon equal
promises with the Gospel.--5. That the general resurrection of the dead does
not follow in virtue of our Saviour's resurrection.--6. That the grace of God
is given according to our merits.--7. That this grace is not granted for the
performance of every moral act; the liberty of the will and information in
points of duty being sufficient.
The founder of this sect was Pelagius, a native
of Great Britain. He was educated in the monastery of Banchor, in Wales, of
which he became a monk, and afterwards an abbot. In the early part of his life
he went over to France, and thence to Rome, where he and his friend Celestius
propagated their opinions, though in a private manner. Upon the approach of the
Goths, A. D. 410, they retired from Rome, and went first into Sicily, and
afterwards into Africa, where they published their doctrines with more freedom.
From Africa, Pelagius passed into Palestine, while Celestius remained at
Carthage, with a view to preferment, desiring to be admitted among the
presbyters of that city. But the discovery of his opinions having blasted all
his hopes, and his errors being condemned in a council held at Carthage, A. D.
412, he departed from that city, and went into the East. It was from this time,
that Augustin, the famous bishop of Hippo, began to attack the tenets of
Pelagius and Celestius in his learned and elegant writings; and to him, indeed,
is principally due the glory of having suppressed this sect in its very birth.
Things went more smoothly with Pelagius in the
East, where he enjoyed the protection and favour of John, bishop of Jerusalem,
whose attachment to the sentiments of Origen led him naturally to countenance
those of Pelagius, on account of the conformity that there seemed to be between
these two systems. Under the shadow of this powerful protection, Pelagius made
a public profession of his opinions, and formed disciples in several places.
And by Orosius, a Spanish presbyter, whom Augustin had sent into Palestine for
that purpose, before an assembly of bishops met at Jerusalem, yet he was
dismissed without the least censure; and not only so, but was soon after fully
acquitted of all errors by the council of Diospolis.
This controversy was brought to Rome, and
referred by Celestius and Pelagius to the decision of Zosimus, who was raised
to the pontificate, A. D. 417. The new pontiff, gained over by the ambiguous
and seemingly orthodox confession of faith that Celestius, who was now at Rome,
had artfully drawn up, and also by the letters and protestations of Pelagius,
pronounced in favour of the faith, and unjustly persecuted by their
adversaries. The African bishops, with Augustin at their head, little affected
with this declaration, continued obstinately to maintain the judgment they had
pronounced in this matter, and to strengthen it by their exhortations, their
letters and their writings, Zosimus yielded to the perseverance of the
Africans, changed his mind, and condemned, with the utmost severity, Pelagius
and Celestius, whom he had honoured his protection. This was followed by a
train of evils, which pursued these two monks without interruption. They were
condemned, says Mosheim, by that same Ephesian council which had launched its
thunder at the head of Nestorius. In short, the Gauls, Britons, and Africans,
by their councils, and emperors, by their edicts and penal laws, demolished
this sect in its infancy, and suppressed it entirely before it had acquired any
tolerable degree of vigour or consistence.
A punishment either voluntary, or imposed by authority, for the faults a person has committed. Penance is one of the seven sacraments of the Romish Church. Besides fasting, alms, abstinence, and the like, which are the general conditions of penance, there are others of a more particular kind; as the repeating a certain number of avemary's paternosters, and credos; wearing a hair shift, and giving oneself a certain number of stripes. In Italy and Spain it is usual to see Christians, almost naked, loaded with chains, and lashing themselves at every step. See POPERY.
Is sometimes used for a state of repentance, and
sometimes for the act of repenting. It is also used for a discipline or
punishment attending repentance, more usually called penance. It also gives
title to several religious orders, consisting either of converted debauchees
and reformed prostitutes, or of persons who devote themselves to the office of
reclaiming them. See next article.
Order of penitents of St. Magdalen was
established about the year 1272, by one Barnard, a citizen of Marseilles, who
devoted himself to the work of converting the courtesans of that city. Barnard
was seconded by several others, who, forming a kind of society, were at length
erected into a religious order by pope Nicholas III. under the rule of St.
Augustin. F. Gesney says, they also made a religious order of the penitents, or
women they converted, giving them the same rules and observances which they
themselves kept.
Congregation of penitents of St. Magdalen at
Paris, owed its rise to the preaching of F. Tisseran, a Franciscan, who
converted a vast number of courtesans, about the year 1492. Louis, duke of
Orleans, gave them his house for a monastery; or rather, as appears by their
constitution, Charles VIII. gave them the hotel called Bochaigne, whence they
were removed to St. George's Chapel, in 1572. By virtue of a brief of pope Alexander,
Simon, bishop of Paris, in 1497, drew them up a body of statutes, and gave them
the rule of
St. Augustin. It was necessary before a woman could be admitted, that she had
first committed the sin of the flesh. None were admitted who were above thirty-five
years of age. Since its reformation by Mary Alvequin, in 1616, none have been
admitted but maids, who, however, still retain the ancient name, penitents.
An appellation given to certain fraternities of
penitents, distinguished by the different shape and colour of their habits.
These are secular societies, who have their rules, statutes, and churches, and
make public processions under their particular crosses or banners. Of these, it
is said, there are more than a hundred, the most considerable of which are as
follow: the White Penitents, of which there are several different sorts at
Rome, the most ancient of which was instituted in 1264: the brethren of this
fraternity every year give portions to a certain number of young girls, in
order to their being married: their habit is a kind of white sackcloth, and on
the shoulder is a circle, in the middle of which is a red and white cross.
Black Penitents, the most considerable of which are the Brethren of Mercy,
instituted in 1488 by some Florentines, in order to assist criminals during
their imprisonment, and at the time of their death. On the day of execution
they walk in procession before them, singing the seven penitential psalms, and
the litanies; and after they are dead, they take them down from the gibbet, and
bury them: their habit is black sackcloth. There are others whose business is
to bury such persons as are found dead in the streets; these wear a death's
head on one side of their habit. There are also blue, gray, red, green, and
violet penitents, all which are remarkable for little else besides the
different colours of their habits.
Penitents, or Converts of the name of Jesus, a
congregation of religious at Seville, in Spain, consisting of women who have
led a licentious life, founded in 1550. This monastery is divided into three
quarters: one for professed religious; another for novices; a third for those
who are under correction. When these last give signs of a real repentance, they
are removed into the quarter of the novices, where, if they do not behave
themselves well, they are remanded to their correction. They observe the rule
of St. Augustin.
Penitents of Orvieto, are an order of nuns
instituted by Antony Simoncelli, a gentleman of Orvieto, in Italy. The
monastery he built was at first designed for the reception of poor girls
abandoned by their parents, and in danger of losing their virtue. In 1662, it
was erected into a monastery, for the reception of such as having abandoned
themselves to impurity, were willing to take up, and consecrate themselves to
God by solemn vows. Their rule is that of the Carmelites.
An ecclesiastical book retained among the Romanists, in which is prescribed what relates to the imposition of penance, and the reconciliation of penitents. There are various penitentials, as the Roman penitential; that of the venerable Bede; that of pope Gregory the Third, &c.
In the ancient Christian church, a name given to
certain presbyters or
priests, appointed in every church to receive the private confessions of the
people, in order to facilitate public discipline, by acquainting them what sins
were to the expiated by public penance, and to appoint private penance for such
private crimes as were not proper to be publicly censured.
Penitentiary, also, in the court of Rome, is an
office in which are examined and delivered out the secret bulls, dispensations,
&c. Penitentiary is also an officer in some cathedrals, vested with power
from the bishop to absolve in cases referred to him.
From five, and an instrument or volume, signifies the collection of the five instruments or books of Moses, which are Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. Some modern writers, it seems, have asserted that Moses did not compose the Pentateuch, because the author always speaks in the third person; abridges his narration like a writer who collected from ancient memoirs; sometimes interrupts the thread of his discourse, for example, Gen. iv. 23; and because of the account of the death of Moses at the end, &c. It is observed, also, in the text of the Pentateuch, that there are some places that are defective: for example, in Exod. xii. 8. we see Moses speaking to Pharaoh, where the author omits the beginning of his discourse. The Samaritan inserts in the same place what is wanting in the Hebrew. In other places the same Samaritan copy adds what is deficient in the Hebrew; and what is contained more than the Hebrew seems so well connected with the rest of the discourse, that it would be difficult to separate them. Lastly, they think they observe certain strokes in the Pentateuch which can hardly agree with Moses, who was born and bred in Egypt; as what he says of the earthly paradise, of the rivers that watered it and ran through it; of the cities of Babylon, Erech, Resen, and Calmeh; of the gold of Pison; of the bdellium, of the stone of Sohem, or onyx stone, which was to be found in that country.--These particulars, observed with such curiosity, seem to prove that the author of the Pentateuch lived beyond the Euphrates. Add what he says concerning the ark of Noah, of its construction, of the place where it rested, of the wood wherewith it was built, of the bitumen of Babylon, &c. But in answer to all these objections it is justly observed, that these books are by the most ancient writers ascribed to Moses, and it is confirmed by the authority of heathen writers themselves, that they are his writings; besides this, we have the unanimous testimony of the whole Jewish nation ever since Moses's time. Divers texts of the Pentateuch imply that it was written by him; and the book of Joshua and other parts of Scripture import as much; and though some passages have been thought to imply the contrary, yet this is but a late opinion, and has been sufficiently confuted by several learned men. It is probable, however, that Ezra published a new edition of the books of Moses, in which he might add those passages that many suppose Moses did not write. The Abbe Torne, in a sermon preached before the French king in Lent, 1764, makes the following remarks: "The legislator of the Jews was the author of the Pentateuch; an immortal work, wherein he paints the marvels of his reign with the majestic picture of the government and religion which he established! Who before our modern infidels ever ventured to obscure this incontestable fact? Who ever sprang a doubt about this among the Hebrews?--What greater reasons have there ever been to attribute to Mahomet his Alcoran, to Plato his Republic, or to Homer his sublime poems? Rather let us say, What work in any age ever appeared more truly to bear the name of its real author? It is not an ordinary book, which, like many others, may be easily hazarded under a fictitious name. It is a sacred book, which the Jews have always read with a veneration, that remains after seventeen hundred years exile, calamities, and reproach. In this book the Hebrews included all their science; it was their civil, political, and sacred code, their only treasure, their calendar, their annals, the only title of their sovereigns and pontiffs, the alone rule of polity and worship: by consequence it must be formed with their monarchy, and necessarily have the same epoch as their government and religion, &c.--Moses speaks only truth, though infidels charge him with imposture. But, great God! what an impostor must he be, who first spoke of the divinity in a manner so sublime, that no one since, during almost four thousand years, has been able to surpass him! What an impostor must he be whose writings breathe only virtue; whose style equally simple, affecting, and sublime, in spite of the rudeness of those first ages, openly displays an inspiration altogether divine!" See Ainsworth and Kidder on the Pentateuch; Prideaux's Con. vol. i. p. 342, 345,573,575; Marsh's Authenticity of the Five Books of Moses considered; Warburton's Divine Legation; Dr. Graves's lectures on the last four books in the Old Test. Jenkins's Reasonableness of Christianity; Watson's Apology, let. 2 and 3; Tabor's Horae Mosaicae, or a View of the Mosaical Records.
A solemn festival of the Jews, so called, because it was celebrated fifty days after the feast of the passover, Lev. xxiii. 15. It corresponds with the Christians' Whitsuntide, for which it is sometimes used.
That state or quality of a thing, in which it is free from defect or redundancy. According to some, it is divided into physical or natural, whereby a thing has all its powers and faculties; moral, or an eminent degree of goodness and piety; and metaphysical or transcendant is the possession of all the essential attributes or parts necessary to the integrity of a substance; or it is that whereby a thing has or is provided of every thing belonging to its nature; such is the perfection of God.--The term perfection, says the great Witsius, is not always used in the same sense in the Scriptures. 1. There is a perfection of sincerity, whereby a man serves God without hypocrisy, Job i. 1. Is. xxxviii. 3..--2. There is a perfection of parts, subjective with respect to the whole man, 1 Thess. v. 23. and objective with respect to the whole law, when all the duties prescribed by God are observed, Ps. cxix. 128. Luke i. 6.--3. There is a comparative perfection ascribed to those who are advanced in knowledge, faith, and sanctification, in comparison of those who are still infants and untaught, 1 John ii. 13. 1 Cor. ii. 6. Phil. iii. 15.--45. There is an evangelical perfection. The righteousness of Christ being imputed to the believer, he is complete in him, and accepted of God as perfect through Christ, Col. ii. 10. Eph. v. 27. 2 Cor. v. 21.--5. There is also a perfection of degrees, by which a person performs all the commands of God with the full exertion of all his powers, without the least defect. This is what the law of God requires, but what the saints cannot attain to in this life, though we willingly allow them all the other kinds above-mentioned, Rom. vii. 24. Phil. iii. 12. 1 John i. 8. Witsii OEconomia Faederum Dei, lib. iii. cap. 12 & 124; Bates's Works, p. 557, &c. Law and Wesley on Perfection; Doddridge's Lectures, lec. 181.
See ATTRIBUTES.
Is the taking of an oath, in order to tell or confirm a falsehood. This is a very heinous crime, as it is treating the Almighty with irreverence; denying, or at least discarding his omniscience; profaning his name, and violating truth. It has always been esteemed a very detestable thing, and those who have been proved guilty of it, have been looked upon as the pests of society. See OATH.
See SIN.
Is any pain or affliction which a person
designedly inflicts upon another; and, in a more restrained sense, the
sufferings of Christians on account of their religion. Persecution is
threefold. 1. Mental, when the spirit of a man rises up and opposes
another.--2. Verbal, when men give hard words and deal in uncharitable
censures.--3. Actual or open, by the hand, such as the dragging of innocent
persons before the tribunal of Justice, Matt. x. 18. The unlawfulness of
persecution for conscience sake must appear plain to every one that possesses
the least degree of thought or of feeling. "To banish, imprison, plunder,
starve, hang, and burn men for religion," says the shrewd Jortin, "is
not the Gospel of Christ; it is the Gospel of the Devil. Where persecution
begins, Christianity ends. Christ never used any thing that looked like force
or violence, except once; and that was to drive bad men out of the temple, and
not to drive them in."
We know the origin of it to be from the prince of
darkness, who began the dreadful practice in the first family on earth, and
who, more or less, has been carrying on the same work ever since, and that
almost among all parties. "Persecution for conscience sake," says Dr.
Doddridge, "is every way inconsistent, because, 1. It is founded on an
absurd supposition, that one man has a right to judge for another in matters of
religion.l--2. It is evidently opposite to that fundamental principle of
morality; that we should do to others as we could reasonably desire they should
do to us.--3. It is by no means calculated to answer the end which its patrons
profess to intend by it.--4. It evidently tends to produce a great deal of
mischief and confusion in the world.--5. The Christian religion must, humanly
speaking, be not only obstructed, but destroyed, should persecuting principles
universally prevail.--6. Persecution is so far from being required, or
encouraged by the Gospel, that it is most directly contrary to many of its
precepts, and indeed to the whole of it."
The chief objects who have fell a prey to this
diabolical spirit have been Christians; a short account of whose sufferings we
shall here give, as persecuted by the Jews, Heathens, and those of the same
name.
Persecution of Christians by the Jews. Here we
need not be copious, as the New Testament will inform the reader more
particularly how the first Christians suffered for the cause of truth. Jesus
Christ himself was exposed to it in the greatest degree. The four evangelists
record the dreadful scenes, which need not here be enlarged on. After his
death, the apostles suffered every evil which the malice of the Jews could
invent, and their mad zeal execute. They who read the Acts of the Apostles,
will find that, like their Master, they were despised and rejected of men, and
treated with the utmost indignity and contempt.
II. Persecution of Christians by the Heathen.
Historians usually reckon ten general persecutions, the first of which was
under the emperor Nero, thirty-one years after our Lord's ascension, when that
emperor, having set fire to the city of Rome, threw the odium of that execrable
action on the Christians. First. Those were apprehended who openly avowed
themselves to be of that sect; then by them were discovered an immense
multitude, all of whom were convicted. Their death and tortures were aggravated
by cruel derision and sport; for they were either covered with the skins of
wild beasts and torn in pieces by devouring dogs, or fastened to crosses, and
wrapped up in combustible garments, that, when the day-light failed, they
might, like torches, serve to dispel the darkness of the night. For this
tragical spectacle Nero lent his own gardens; and exhibited at the same time
the public diversions of the circus; sometimes driving a chariot in person, and
sometimes standing as a spectator, while the shrieks of women burning to ashes
supplied music for his ears.--2. The second general persecution was under
Domitian, in the year 95, when 40,000 were supposed to have suffered
martyrdom.--3. The third began in the third year of Trajan, in the year 100,
and was carried on with great violence for several years.--4. The fourth was
under Antoninus, when the Christians were banished from their houses, forbidden
to show their heads, reproached, beaten, hurried from place to place,
plundered, imprisoned, and stoned.--5. The fifth began in the year 127, under
Severus, when great cruelties were committed. In this reign happened the
martyrdom of Perpetua and Felicitas, and their companions. Perpetua had an
infant at the breast, and Felicitas was just delivered at the time of their
being put to death. These two beautiful and amiable young women, mothers of
infant children, after suffering much in prison, were exposed before an
insulting multitude to a wild cow, who mangled their bodies in a most horrid
manner: after which they were carried to a conspicuous place, and put to death
by the sword.--6. The sixth began with the reign of Maximinus, in 235.--7. The
seventh, which was the most dreadful ever known, began in 250, under the
emperor Decius, when the christians were in all places driven from their
habitations, stripped of their estates, tormented with racks, &c.--8. The
eighth began in 257, under Valerian. Both men and women suffered death, some by
scourging, some by the sword, and some by fire.--9. The ninth was under Aurelian,
in 274; but this was inconsiderable, compared with the others
before-mentioned.--10. The tenth began in the nineteenth year of Dioclesian,
303. In this dreadful persecution, which lasted ten years, houses filled with
Christians were set on fire, and whole droves were tied together with ropes,
and thrown into the sea. It is related that 17,000 were slain in one month's
time; and that during the continuance of this persecution, in the province of
Egypt alone, no less than 144,000 Christians died by the violence of their
persecutors; besides 700,000 that died through the fatigues of banishment, or
the public works to which they were condemned.
III. Persecution of Christians by those of the
same name. Numerous were the persecutions of different sects from Constantine's
time to the reformation; but when the famous Martin Luther arose, and opposed
the errors and ambition of the church of Rome, and the sentiments of this good
man began to spread, the pope and his clergy joined all their forces to hinder
their progress. A general council of the clergy was called: this was the famous
council of Trent, which was held for near eighteen successive years, for the
purpose of establishing popery in greater splendour, and preventing the
reformation. The friends to the reformation were anathematized and
excommunicated, and the life of Luther was often in danger, though at last he
died on the bed of peace. From time to time innumerable schemes were suggested
to overthrow the reformed church, and wars were set on foot for the same
purpose. The invincible armada, as it was vainly called, had the same end in
view. The inquisition, which was established in the twelfth century against the
Waldenses (See INQUISITION) was not more effectually set to work. Terrible
persecutions were carried on in various parts of Germany, and even in Bohemia,
which continued about thirty years, and the blood of the saints was said to
flow like rivers of water. The countries of Poland, Lithuania, and Hungary,
were in a similar manner deluged with Protestant blood. In
HOLLAND, and in the other Low Countries, for many
years the most amazing cruelties were exercised under the merciless and
unrelenting hands of the Spaniards, to whom the inhabitants of that part of the
world were then in subjection. Father Paul observes, that these Belgic martyrs
were 50,000; but Grotius and others observe, that there were 100,000 who
suffered by the hand of the executioner. Herein, however, Satan and his agents
failed of their purpose; for in the issue great part of the Netherlands shook
off the Spanish yoke, and erected themselves into a separate and independent
state, which has ever since been considered as one of the principal Protestant
countries of the universe.
FRANCE. No country, perhaps, has ever produced
more martyrs than this. After many cruelties had been exercised against the
Protestants, there was a most violent persecution of them in the year 1572, in
the reign of Charles IX. Many of the principal Protestants were invited to
Paris under a solemn oath of safety, upon occasion of the marriage of the king
of Navarre with the French king's sister. The queen dowager of Navarre, a
zealous Protestant, however, was poisoned by a pair of gloves before the
marriage was solemnized. Coligni, admiral of France, was basely murdered in his
own house, and then thrown out of the window to gratify the malice of the duke
of Guise: his head was afterwards cut off, and sent to the king and
queen-mother; and his body, after a thousand indignities offered to it, hung by
the feet on a gibbet. After this the murderers ravaged the whole city of Paris,
and butchered in three days, above ten thousand lords, gentlemen, presidents,
and people of all ranks. A horrible scene of things, says Thuanus, when the
very streets and passengers resounded with the noise of those that met together
for murder and plunder; and groans of those who were dying, and the shrieks of
such as were just going to be butchered, were everywhere heard; the bodies of
the slain thrown out of the windows; the courts and chambers of the houses
filled with them; the dead bodies of others dragged through the streets; their
blood running through the channels in such plenty, that torrents seemed to
empty themselves in the neighbouring river, in a word, an innumerable multitude
of men, women with child, maidens, and children, were all involved in one
common destruction; and the gates and entrances of the king's palace all
besmeared with their blood. From the city of Paris the massacre spread
throughout the whole kingdom. In the city of Meaux they threw above two hundred
into gaol; and after they had ravished and killed a great number of women, and
plundered the houses of the Protestants, they executed their fury on those they
had imprisoned; and calling them one by one, they were killed, as Thuanus
expresses, like sheep in a market. In Orleans they murdered above five hundred,
men, women, and children, and enriched themselves with the spoil. The same
cruelties were practised at Angers, Troyes, Bouges, La Charite, and especially
at Lyons, where they inhumanly destroyed above eight hundred Protestants;
children hanging on their parents's necks; parents embracing their children;
putting ropes about the necks of some, dragging them through the streets, and
throwing them, mangled, torn, and half dead, into the river. According to
Thuanus, above 30,000 Protestants were destroyed in this massacre; or, as
others affirm, above 100,000. But what aggravates these scenes with still
greater wantonness and cruelty, was, the manner in which the news was received
at Rome. When the letters of the pope's legate were read in the assembly of the
cardinals, by which he assured the pope that all was transacted by the express
will and command of the king, it was immediately decreed that the pope should
march with his cardinals to the church of St. Mark, and in the most solemn
manner give thanks to God for so great a blessing conferred on the see of Rome
and the Christian world; and that, on the Monday after, solemn mass should be
celebrated in the church of Minerva, at which the pope, Gregory, XIII. and
cardinals were present; and that a jubilee should be published throughout the
whole Christian world, and the cause of it declared to be, to return thanks to
God for the extirpation of the enemies of the truth and church in France. In
the evening the cannon of St. Angelo were fired to testify the public joy; the
whole city illuminated with bonfires; and no one sign of rejoicing omitted that
was usually made for the greatest victories obtained in favour of the Roman
church!!!
But all these persecutions were, however, far
exceeded in cruelty by those which took place in the time of Louis XIV. It
cannot be pleasant to any man's feelings, who has the least humanity, to recite
these dreadful scenes of horror, cruelty, and devastation; but to show what
superstition, bigotry, and fanaticism are capable of producing, and for the
purpose of holding up the spirit of persecution to contempt, we shall here give
as concise a detail as possible. The troopers, soldiers, and dragoons, went
into the Protestants' houses, where they marred and defaced their household
stuff; broke their looking-glasses and other utensils; threw about their corn
and wine; sold what they could not destroy; and thus, in four or five days, the
Protestants were stripped of above a million of money. But this was not the
worst: they turned the dining rooms of gentlemen into stables for horses, and
treated the owners of the houses where they quartered with the greatest
cruelty, lashing them about, not suffering them to eat or drink. When they saw
the blood and sweat run down their faces, they sluiced them with water, and,
putting over their heads kettle-drums turned upside down, they made a continual
din upon them till these unhappy creatures lost their senses. At Negreplisse, a
town near Montaubon, they hung up Isaac Favin, a Protestant citizen of that
place, by his arm-pits, and tormented him a whole night by pinching and tearing
off his flesh with pincers. They made a great fire round about a boy, twelve
years old, who, with hands and eyes lifted up to heaven, cried out, "My
God, help me!" and when they found the youth resolved to die rather than
renounce his religion, they snatched him from the fire just as he was on the
point of being burnt. In several places the soldiers applied red hot irons to
the hands and feet of men, and the breasts of women. At Nantes, they hung up
several women and maids by their feet, and others by their arm-pits, and thus
exposed them to public view stark naked. They bound mothers, that gave suck, to
posts, and let their sucking infants lie languishing in their sight for several
days and nights, crying and gasping for life. Some they bound before a great
fire, and, being half toasted, let them go; a punishment worse than death.
Amidst a thousand hideous cries, they hung up men and women by the hair, and
some by their feet, on hooks in chimneys, and smoked them with wisps of wet hay
till they suffocated. They tied some under the arms with ropes, and plunged
them again and again into wells; they bound others, put them to torture, and
with a funnel filled them with wine till the fumes of it took away their
reason, when they made them say they consented to be Catholics. They stripped
them naked, and, after a thousand indignities, stuck them with pins and needles
from head to foot. In some places they tied fathers and husbands to their
bed-posts, and, before their eyes, ravished their wives and daughters with
impunity. They blew up men and women with bellows till they burst them. If any,
to escape these barbarities, endeavoured to save themselves by flight, they
pursued them into the fields and woods, where they shot at them, like wild
beasts, and prohibited them from departing the kingdom (a cruelty never
practised by Nero or Dioclesian,) upon pain of confiscation of effects, the
galleys, the lash, and perpetual imprisonment. With these scenes of desolation
and horror the popish clergy feasted their eyes, and made only matter of
laughter and sport of them!!!
ENGLAND has also been the seat of much
persecution. Though Wickliffe, the first reformer, died peaceably in his bed,
yet such was the malice and spirit of persecuting Rome, that his bones were
ordered to be dug up, and cast upon a dunghill. The remains of this excellent
man were accordingly dug out of the grave, where they had lain undisturbed
four-and-forty years. His bones were burnt, and the ashes cast into an
adjoining brook. In the reign of Henry VIII. Bilney, Bayman, and many other
reformers were burnt; but when queen Mary came to the throne, the most severe
persecutions took place. Hooper and Rogers were burnt in a slow fire. Saunders
was cruelly tormented a long time at the stake before he expired. Taylor was
put into a barrel of pitch, and fire set to it. Eight illustrious persons,
among whom was Ferrar, bishop of St. David's, were sought out, and burnt by the
infamous Bonner in a few days. Sixty-seven persons were this year, A. D. 1555,
burnt, amongst whom were the famous Protestants, Bradford, Ridley, Latimer, and
Philpot. In the following year, 1556, eighty-five persons were burnt. Women
suffered; and one, in the flames, which burst her womb, being near her time of
delivery, a child fell from her into the fire, which being snatched out by some
of the observers more humane that the rest, the magistrate ordered the babe to
be again thrown into the fire, and burnt. Thus even the unborn child was burnt
for heresy! O God, what is human nature when left to itself! Alas! dispositions
ferocious as infernal then reign, and usurp the heart of man! The queen erected
a commission court, which was followed by the destruction of near eighty more.
Upon the whole, the number of those who suffered death for the reformed
religion in this reign, were no less that two hundred and seventy-seven
persons; of whom were five bishops, twenty-one clergymen, eight gentlemen,
eight-four tradesmen, one hundred husbandmen, labourers, and servants,
fifty-five women, and four children. Besides these, there were fifty-four more
under prosecution, seven of whom were whipped, and sixteen perished in prison.
Nor was the reign of Elizabeth free from this persecuting spirit. If any one
refused to consent to the least ceremony in worship, he was cast into prison,
where many of the most excellent men in the land perished. Two Protestant
Anabaptists were burnt, and many banished. She also, it is said, put two
Brownists to death; and though her whole reign was distinguished for its
political prosperity, yet it is evident that she did not understand the rights
of conscience; for it is said that more sanguinary laws were made in her reign
than in any of her predecessors, and her hands were stained with the blood both
of Papists and Puritans. James I. succeeded Elizabeth; he published a
proclamation, commanding all Protestants to conform strictly, and without any
exception, to all the rites and ceremonies of the church of England. Above five
hundred clergy were immediately silenced, or degraded, for not complying. Some
were excommunicated, and some banished the country. The Dissenters were
distressed, censured, and fined, in the Star-chamber. Two persons were burnt
for heresy, one at Smithfield, and the other at Litchfield. Worn out with
endless vexations, and unceasing persecutions, many retired into Holland, and
from thence to America. It is witnessed by a judicious historian, that, in this
and some following reigns, 22,000 persons were banished from England by
persecution to America. In Charles the First's time arose the persecuting Laud,
who was the occasion of distress to numbers. Dr. Leighton, for writing a book
against the hierarchy, was fined ten thousand pounds, perpetual imprisonment,
and whipping. He was whipped, and then placed in the pillory; one of his ears
cut off, one side of his nose slit; branded on the cheek with a red hot iron,
with the letters S. S. whipped a second time, and placed in the pillory. A
fortnight afterwards, his sores being yet uncured, he had the other ear cut
off, the other side of his nose slit, and the other cheek branded. He continued
in prison till the long parliament set him at liberty. About four years
afterwards, William Prynn, a barrister, for a book he wrote against the sports
on the Lord's day, was deprived from practising at Lincoln's Inn, degraded from
his degree at Oxford, set in the pillory, had his ears cut off, imprisoned for
life, and fined five thousand pounds. Nor were the Presbyterians, when their
government came to be established in England, free from the charge of
persecution. In 1645 an ordinance was published, subjecting all who preached or
wrote against the Presbyterian directory for public worship to a fine not
exceeding fifty pounds; and imprisonment for a year, for the third offence, in
using the episcopal book of common prayer, even in a private family. In the
following year the Presbyterians applied to Parliament, pressing them to
enforce uniformity in religion, and to extirpate popery, prelacy, heresy,
schism, &c. but their petition was rejected; yet in 1648 the parliament,
ruled by them, published an ordinance against heresy, and determined that any
person who maintained, published, or defended the following errors, should
suffer death. These errors were. 1. Denying the being of a God.--2. Denying his
omnipresence, omniscience,&c.--3. Denying the Trinity in any way.--4.
Denying that Christ had two natures.--5. Denying the resurrection, the
atonement, the Scriptures. In Charles the Second's reign the act of uniformity
passed, by which two thousand clergymen were deprived of their benefices. Then
followed the conventicle act, and the Oxford act, under which, it is said,
eight thousand persons were imprisoned and reduced to want, and many to the
grave. In this reign also, the Quakers were much persecuted, and numbers of
them imprisoned. Thus we see how England had bled under the hand of bigotry and
persecution; nor was toleration enjoyed until William III. came to the throne,
who showed himself a warm friend to the rights of conscience. The accession of
the present royal family was auspicious to religious liberty; and as their
majesties have always befriended the toleration, the spirit of persecution has
been long curbed.
IRELAND has likewise been drenched with the blood
of the Protestants, forty or fifty thousand of whom were cruelly murdered in a
few days, in different parts of the kingdom, in the reign of Charles I. It
began on the 23d of October, 1641. Having secured the principal gentlemen, and
seized their effects, they murdered the common people in cold blood, forcing
many thousands to fly from their houses and settlements naked into the bogs and
woods, where they perished with hunger and cold. Some they whipped to death,
others they stripped naked, and exposed to shame, and then drove them like
herds of swine to perish in the mountains: many hundreds were drowned in
rivers, some had their throats cut, others were dismembered. With some the
execrable villians made themselves sport, trying who could hack the deepest
into an Englishman's flesh: wives and young virgins abused in the presence of
their nearest relations; nay, they taught their children to strip and kill the
children of the English, and dash out their brains against the stones. Thus
many thousands were massacred in a few days, without distinction of age, sex,
or quality, before they suspected their danger, or had time to provide for
their defence.
SCOTLAND, SPAIN,&c.
Besides the above-mentioned persecutions, there
have been several others carried on in different parts of the world. Scotland
for many years together has been the scene of cruelty and blood-shed, till it
was delivered by the monarch at the revolution. Spain, Italy, and the valley of
Piedmont, and other places, have been the seats of much persecution. Popery, we
see has had the greatest hand in this mischievous work. It has to answer, also,
for the lives of millions of Jews, Mahometans, and barbarians. When the Moors
conquered Spain, in the eighth century, they allowed the Christians the free
exercise of their religion; but in the fifteenth century, when the Moors were
overcome, and Ferdinand subdued the Moriscoes, the descendants of the above
Moors, many thousands were forced to be baptised, or burnt, massacred, or
banished, and the children sold for slaves; besides innumerable Jews, who
shared the same cruelties, chiefly by means of the infernal courts of
inquisition. A worst slaughter, if possible, was made among the natives of
Spanish America, where fifteen millions are said to have been sacrificed to the
genius of popery in about forty years. It has been computed that fifty millions
of Protestants have at different times been the victims of the persecutions of
the Papists, and put to death for their religious opinions. Well, therefore,
might the inspired penman say, that at mystic Babylon's destruction, 'was found
in her the blood of prophets, of saints, and of all that was slain upon the
earth,' Rev. xviii. 24.
To conclude this article, Who can peruse the
account here given without feeling the most painful emotions, and dropping a
tear over the madness and depravity of mankind? Does it not show us what human
beings are capable of when influenced by superstition, bigotry, and prejudice?
Have not these baneful principles metamorphosed men into infernals; and
entirely extinguished all the feelings of humanity, the dictates of conscience,
and the voice of reason? Alas! what has sin done to make mankind such curses to
one another? Merciful God! by they great power suppress this worst of all
evils, and let truth and love, meekness and forbearance universally prevail!
Limborch's Introduction to his History of the Inquisition; Memoirs of the
Persecutions of the Protestants in France by Lewis De Enarolles; Comber's
History of the Parisian Massacre of St. Bartholomew; A. Robinson's History of
Persecution; Lockman's History of Popish Persec. Clark's Looking-Glass for
Persecutors; Doddridge's Sermon on Persecution; Jortin's ditto, ser. 9. vol.
iv. Bower's Lives of the Popes; Fox's Martyrs; Woodrow's History of the
Sufferings of the Church of Scotland; Neal's History of the Puritans, and of
New England; History of the Bohemian Persecutions.
Is the continuance in any design, state,
opinion, or course of action. The perseverance of the saints is their
continuance in a state of grace to a state of glory. This doctrine has afforded
considerable matter for controversy between the Calvinists and Arminians. We
shall briefly here state the arguments and objections. And, first, the
perfections of God are considered as strong arguments to prove this doctrine.
God, as a Being possessed of infinite love, faithfulness, wisdom, and power,
can hardly be supposed to suffer any of his people finally to fall into
perdition. This would be a reflection on his attributes, and argue him to be worse
than a common father of his family. His love to his people is unchangeable, and
therefore they cannot be the objects of it at one time and not at another, John
xiii. 1. Zeph. iii. 17. Jer. xxxi. 3. His faithfulness to them and to his
promise is not founded upon their merit, but his own will and goodness: this,
therefore, cannot be violated, Mal. iii. 6. Numb. xxiii. 19. His wisdom
foresees every obstacle in the way, and is capable of removing it, and
directing them into the right path. It would be a reflection on his wisdom,
after choosing a right end, not to choose right means in accomplishing the
same, Jer. x. 6,7. His power is insuperable, and is absolutely and perpetually
displayed in their preservation and protection, 1 Peter i. 5.--2. Another argument
to prove this doctrine is their union to Christ, and what he has done for them.
They are said to be chosen in him, Eph. i. 4. united to him, Eph. i. 23. the
purchase of his death, Rom. viii. 34. Tit. ii. 14; the objects of his
intercession, Rom. v. 10. Rom. viii. 34. 1 John ii. 1,2. Now if there be a
possibility of their finally falling, then this choice, this union, his death
and intercession, may all be in vain, and rendered abortive; an idea as
derogatory to the divine glory, and as dishonourable to Jesus Christ, as
possibly can be.--3. It is argued, from the work of the Spirit, which is to
communicate grace and strength equal to the day, Phil. i. 6. 2 Cor. i. 21, 22.
If, indeed, divine grace were dependent on the will of man, if by his own power
he had brought himself into a state of grace, then it might follow that he
might relapse into an opposite state when that power at any time was weakened;
but as the perseverance of the saints is not produced by any native principles
in themselves, but by the agency of the Holy Spirit, enlightening, confirming,
and establishing them, of course, they must persevere, or otherwise it would be
a reflection on this Divine agent, Rom. viii. 9. 1 Cor. vi. 11. John iv. 14.
John xvi. 14.--4. Lastly, the declarations and promises of Scripture are very
numerous in favour of this doctrine, Job xvii. 9. Psal. xciv. 14. Psal. cxxv.
Jer. xxxii. 40. John x. 28. John xvii. 12. 1 Cor. i. 8,9. 1 Pet. i. 5. Prov.
iv. 18. all which could not be true, if this doctrine were false. There are
objections, however, to this doctrine, which we must state.--1. There are
various threatenings denounced against those who apostatize, Ezek. iii. 20.
Heb. vi. 3,6. Psal. cxxv. 3-5. Ezek. xviii. 24. To this it is answered, that
some of these texts do not so much as suppose the falling away of a truly good
man; and to all of them, it is said, that they only show what would be the
consequence if such should fall away; but cannot prove that it ever in fact
happens.--2. It is foretold as a future event that some should fall away, Matt.
xxiv. 12, 13. John xv. 6. Matt. xiii. 20, 21. To the first of these passages it
is answered, that their love might be said to wax cold without totally ceasing;
or there might have been an outward zeal and show of love where there never was
a true faith. To the second it is answered, that persons may be said to be in
Christ only by an external profession, or mere members of the visible church,
John xv. 2. Matt. xiii. 47, 48. As to Matthew, ch. xiii. v. 20, 21. it is
replied, that this may refer to the joy with which some may entertain the
offers of pardon, who never, after all, attentively considered them.--3. It is
objected that many have in fact fallen away, as David, Solomon, Peter,
Alexander, Hymeneus, &c. to which it is answered, that David, Solomon, and
Peter's fall, were not total; and as to the others, there is no proof of their
ever being true Christians.--4. It is urged, that this doctrine supersedes the
use of means, and renders exhortations unnecessary. To which it may be
answered, that perseverance itself implies the use of means, and that the means
are equally appointed as well as the end: nor has it ever been found that true
Christians have rejected them. They consider exhortations to be some of the
means they are to attend to in order to promote their holiness: Christ and his
apostles, though they often asserted this doctrine, yet reproved, exhorted, and
made use of means. See EXHORTATION, MEANS.--5. Lastly, it is objected that this
doctrine gives great encouragement to carnal security and presumptuous sin. To
which it is answered, that this doctrine, like many others, may be abused, by
hypocrites, but cannot be so by those who are truly serious, it being the very
nature of grace to lead to righteousness, Tit.ii. 10, 12. Their knowledge leads
to veneration; their love animates to duty; their faith purifies the heart;
their gratitude excites to obedience; yea, all their principles have a tendency
to set before them the evil of sin, and the beauty of holiness. See Witby and
Gill of the Five Points; Cole on the
Sovereignty of God; Doddridge's Lectures, lec. 179; Turretini Comp. Theologiae;
loc. 14. p. 156; OEconomia Witsii, lib. iii. cap. 13; Toplady's Works, p. 476,
vol. v; Ridgley's Body of Div. qu. 79.
An individual substance of a rational intelligent nature. Some have been offended at the term persons as applied to the Trinity, as unwarrantable. The term person, when applied to Deity, is certainly used in a sense somewhat different from that in which we apply to one another; but when it is considered that the Greek words to which it answers, are, in the New Testament, applied to the Father and Son, Heb. i. 3. 2 Cor. iv. 6. and that no single term, at least, can be found more suitable, it can hardly be condemned as unscriptural and improper. There have been warm debates between the Greek and Latin churches about the words hypostasis and persona; the Latin concluding that the word hypostasis signified substance or essence, thought that to assert that there were three divine hypostases was to say that there were three gods. On the other hand, the Greek church thought that the word person did not sufficiently guard against the Sabellian notion of the same individual Being sustaining three relations; whereupon each part of the church was ready to brand the other with heresy, till by a free and mutual conference in a synod at Alexandria, A. D. 362, they made it appear that it was but a mere contention about the grammatical sense of a word; and then it was allowed by men of temper on both sides, that either of the two words might be indifferently used. See Marci Medulla, l. 5.& 3; Ridgley's Divinity, qu. 11; Hurrion on the Spirit, p. 140; Doddridge's Lectures, lec. 159; Gill on the Trinity, p. 93; Watts' works, vol. v. p. 48, 208; Gill's body of Divinity, vol. i. p. 205, 8 vo. Edwards' History of Redemption, p. 51, note; Horae sol. vol. ii. p. 20.
The act of influencing the judgment and passions by arguments or motives. It is different from conviction. Conviction affects the understanding only; persuasion the will and the practice. It is more extensively used than conviction, which last is founded on demonstration natural or supernatural. But all things of which we may be persuaded, are not capable of demonstration. See Blair's Rhetoric, vol. ii. p. 174.
Was an annual tribute of one penny paid at Rome out of every family at the feast of St. Peter. This, Ina, the Saxon king, when he went in pilgrimage to Rome, about the year 740, gave to the pope, partly as alms, and partly in recompence of a house erected in Rome for English pilgrims. It continued to be paid generally until the time of king Henry VIII. when it was enacted, that henceforth no persons shall pay any pensions, peter-pence, or other impositions, to the use of the bishop and see of Rome.
According to Dr. Watts, is the fourth part of prayer, and includes a desire of deliverance from evil, and a request of good things to be bestowed. On both these accounts petitions are to be offered up to God, not only for ourselves, but for our fellow-creatures also. This part of prayer is frequently called intercession. See PRAYER.
A sect founded about the year 1110 in Languedoc and Provence, by Peter de Bruys, who made the most laudable attempts to reform the abuses and to remove the superstitions that disfigured the beautiful simplicity of the Gospel; though not without a mixture of fanaticism. The following tenets were held by him and his disciples: 1. That no persons whatever were to be baptized before they were come to the full use of their reason.--2. That it was an idle superstition to build churches for the service of God, who will accept of a sincere worship where-ever it is offered; and that, therefore, such churches as had already been erected, were to be pulled down and destroyed.--3. That the crucifixes, as instruments of superstition, deserved the same fate.--4. That the real body and blood of Christ were not exhibited in the eucharist, but were merely represented in that ordinance.--5. That the oblations, prayers, and good words of the living, could be in no respect advantageous to the dead. The founder of this sect, after a laborious ministry of twenty years, was burnt in the year 1130 by an enraged populace set on by the clergy, whose traffic was in danger from the enterprising spirit of this new reformer.
Were followers of Peter John, or Peter Joannis, that is, Peter the son of John, who flourished in the twelfth century. His doctrine was not known till after his death, when his body was taken out of his grave, and burnt. His opinions were, that he alone had the knowledge of the true sense wherein the apostles preached the Gospel; that the reasonable soul is not the form of man; that there is no grace infused by baptism; and that Jesus Christ was pierced with a lance on the cross before he expired.
A famous sect of the Jews who distinguished
themselves by their zeal for the traditions of the idlers, which they derived
from the same fountain with the written word itself; pretending that both were
delivered to Moses from Mount Sinai, and were therefore both of equal
authority. From their rigorous observance of these traditions, they looked upon
themselves as more holy than other men, and therefore separated themselves from
those whom they thought sinners or profane, so as not to eat or drink with
them; and hence, from the Hebrew word pharia, which signifies "to
separate," they had the name of Pharisees, or Sepharatists.
This sect was one of the most ancient and most
considerable among the Jews, but its original is not very well known; however,
it was in great repute in the time of our Saviour, and most probably had its
original at the same time with the traditions.
The extraordinary pretences of the Pharisees to
righteousness, drew after them the common people, who held them in the highest
esteem and veneration. Our Saviour frequently, however, charges them with
hypocrisy, and making the law of God of no effect through their traditions,
Matt. ix. 12. Matt. xv. 1,6. Matt. xxiii. 13, 33. Luke xi. 39, 52. Several of
these traditions are particularly mentioned in the Gospel; but they had a vast
number more, which may be seen in the Talmud, the whole subject whereof is to
dictate and explain those traditions which this sect imposed to be believed and
observed.
The Pharisees, contrary to the opinion of the
Sadducees, held a resurrection from the dead, and the existence of angels and
spirits, Acts xxiii. 8. But, according to Josephus, this resurrection of theirs
was no more than a Pythagorean resurrection, that is, of the soul only, by its
transmigration into another body, and being born anew with it. From the
resurrection they excluded all who were notoriously wicked, being of opinion
that the souls of such persons were transmitted into a state of everlasting
woe. As to lesser crimes, they held they were punished in the bodies which the
souls of those who committed them were next sent into.
Josephus, however, either mistook the faith of
his countrymen, or, which is more probable, wilfully misrepresented it, to
render their opinions more respected by the Roman philosophers, whom he appears
to have, on every occasion, been desirous to please. The Pharisees had many
Pagan notions respecting the soul; but Bishop Bull, in his Harmonia Apostolica,
has clearly proved that they held a resurrection of the body, and that they
supposed a certain bone to remain uncorrupted, to furnish the matter of which
the resurrection body was to be formed. they did not, however, believe that all
mankind were to be raised from the dead. A resurrection was the privilege of
the children of Abraham alone, who were all to rise on Mount Zion; their
incorruptible bones, wherever they might be buried, being carried to that
mountain below the surface of the earth. The state of future felicity in which
the Pharisees believed was very gross: they imagined that men in the next
world, as well as in the present, were to eat and drink, and enjoy the
pleasures of love, each being re-united to his former wife. Hence the
Sadducees, who believed in no resurrection, and supposed our Saviour to teach
it as a Pharisee, very shrewdly urged the difficulty of disposing of the woman
who had in this world been the wife of seven husbands. Had the resurrection of
Christianity been the Pharisaical resurrection, this difficulty would have been
insurmountable; and accordingly we find the people, and even some of the
Pharisees themselves, struck with the manner in which our Saviour removed it.
This sect seems to have had some confused
notions, probably derived from the Chaldeans and Persians, respecting the
pre-existence of souls; and hence it was that Christ's disciples asked him
concerning the blind man, John ix. 2. "Who did sin, this man, or his
parents, that he was born blind?" and when the disciples told Christ that
some said he was Elias, Jeremias, or one of the prophets, Matt. xvi. 14. the
meaning can only be, that they thought he was come into the world with the soul
of Elias, Jeremias, or some other of the old prophets transmigrated into him.
With the Essenes they held absolute predestination, and with the Sadducees free
will; but how they reconciled these seemingly incompatible doctrines is no
where sufficiently explained. The sect of the Pharisees was not extinguished by
the ruin of the Jewish commonwealth. The greatest part of the modern Jews are
still of this sect, being as much devoted to traditions, or the oral law, as
their ancestors were.
A sect or society of the seventeenth century; so called from an English female, whose name was Jane Leadley. She embraced, it is said, the same views and the same kind of religion as Madame Bourignon (See BOURIGNONISTS.) She was of opinion that all dissensions among Christians would cease, and the kingdom of the Redeemer become, even here below, a glorious scene of charity, concord, and felicity, if those who bear the name of Jesus, without regarding the forms of doctrine or discipline that distinguish particular communions, would all join in committing their souls to the care of the internal guide, to be instructed, governed, and formed by his divine impulse and suggestions. Nay, she went still farther, and declared, in the name of the Lord, that this desirable event would actually come to pass, and that she had a divine commission to proclaim the approach of this glorious communion of saints, who were to be gathered in one visible universal church or kingdom before the dissolution of this earthly globe. This prediction she delivered with a peculiar degree of confidence, from a notion that her Philadelphian society was the true kingdom of Christ, in which alone the Divine Spirit resided and reigned. She believed, it is said, the doctrine of the final restoration of all intelligent beings to perfection and happiness.
Compounded of two words which signify the love of mankind. It differs from benevolence only in this: that benevolence extends to every being that has life and sense, and is of course susceptible of pain and pleasure; whereas philanthropy cannot comprehend more than the human race. It differs from friendship, as this affection, subsists only between a few individuals, whilst philanthropy comprehends the whole human species. It is a calm sentiment, which perhaps hardly ever rises to the warmth of affection, and certainly not to the heat of passion.
A sect or party among the Lutherans, the followers of Philip Melancthon. He had strenuously opposed the Ubiquists, who arose in his time; and, the dispute growing still hotter after his death, the university of Wittemburg, who espoused Meiancthon's opinion, were called by the Flaccians, who attacked it, Philipists.
A name given to several persons in France who
entered into a combination to overturn the religion of Jesus, and eradicate
from the human heart every religious sentiment. The man more particularly to
whom the idea first occurred was Voltaire, who being weary (as he said himself)
of hearing people repeat that twelve men were sufficient to establish
Christianity, resolved to prove that one might be sufficient to overturn it.
Full of this project, he swore before the year 1730 to dedicate his life to its
accomplishment; and, for some time, he flattered himself that he should enjoy
alone the glory of destroying the Christian religion. He found, however, that
associates would be necessary; and from the numerous tribe of his admirers and
disciples he chose D'Alembert and Diderot as the most proper persons to
co-operate with him in his designs. But Voltaire was not satisfied with their
aid alone. He contrived to embark in the same cause Frederic II. king of
Prussia, who wished to be thought a philosopher, and who, of course, deemed it
expedient to talk and write against a religion which he had never studied, and
into the evidence of which he had probably never deigned to inquire. This royal
adept was one of the most zealous of Voltaire's condjutors, til he discovered
that the philosophists were waging war with the throne as well as with the
altar. This, indeed, was not originally Voltaire's intention. He was vain: he
loved to be caressed by the great; and, in one word, he was, from natural
disposition, an aristocrat, and an admirer of royalty. But when he found that
almost every sovereign but Frederic disapproved of his impious projects, as
soon as he perceived their issue, he determined to oppose all the governments
on earth rather than forfeit the glory with which he had flattered himself of
vanquishing Christ and his apostles in the field of controversy.
He now set himself, with D'Alembert and Diderot,
to excite universal discontent with the established order of things. For this
purpose they formed secret societies, assumed new names, and employed an
enigmatical language. Thus Frederic was called Luc; D'Alembert, Protagoras, and
sometimes Bertrand; Voltaire, Raton; and Diderot, Platon, or its anagram
Tonpla; while the general term for the conspirators was Cacouce. In their
secret meetings they professed to celebrate the mysteries of Mythra; and their
great object, as they professed to one another, was to confound the wretch,
meaning Jesus Christ. Hence their secret watch-word was Ecrasez l'Infame,
"Crush Christ." If we look into some of the books expressly written
for general circulation, we shall there find the following doctrines; some of
them standing alone in all their naked horrors, others surrounded by sophistry
and meretricious ornaments, to entice the mind into their net before it
perceives their nature, "The Universal Cause, that god of the
philosophers, of the Jews, and of the Christians, is but a chimera and a
phantom. The phenomena of nature only prove the existence of God to a few
prepossessed men; so far from bespeaking a God, they are but the necessary
effects of matter prodigiously diversified. It is more reasonable to admit,
with Manes, of a two-fold God, than of the God of Christianity. We cannot know
whether a God really exists, or whether there is the smallest difference
between good and evil, or vice and virtue. Nothing can be more absurd than to
believe the soul a spiritual being. The immortality of the soul, so far from
stimulating man to the practice of virtue, is nothing but a barbarous,
desperate, fatal tenet, and contrary to all legislation. All ideas of justice
and injustice, of virtue and vice, of glory and infamy, are purely arbitrary,
and dependent on custom. conscience and remorse are nothing but the foresight
of those physical penalties to which crimes expose us. The man who is above the
law can commit, without remorse, the dishonest act that may serve his purpose.
The fear of God, so far from being the beginning of wisdom, should be the
beginning of folly. the command to love one's parents is more the work of
education than of nature. Modesty is only an invention of refined
voluptuousness. The law which condemns married people to live together, becomes
barbarous and cruel on the day they cease to love one another."--These
extracts from the secret correspondence and the public writings of these men,
will suffice to show us the nature and tendency of the dreadful system they had
formed.
The philosophists were diligently employed in
attempting to propagate their sentiments. Their grand Encyclopedia was
converted into an engine to serve this purpose. Voltaire proposed to establish
a colony of philosophists at Cleves, who, protected by the king of Prussia,
might publish their opinions without dread or danger; and Frederic was disposed
to take them under his protection, till he discovered that their opinions were
anarchical as well as impious, when he threw them off, and even wrote against
them. They contrived, however, to engage the ministers of the court of France
in their favour, by pretending to have nothing in view but the enlargement of
science, in works which spoke indeed respectfully of revelation, while every
discovery which they brought forward was meant to undermine its very
foundation. When the throne was to be attacked, and even when barefaced atheism
was to be promulgated, a number of impious and licentious pamphlets were
dispersed (for some time none knew how) from a secret society formed at the
Hotel d'Holbach, at Paris, of which Voltaire was elected honorary and perpetual
president. To conceal their real design, which was the diffusion of their
infidel sentiments, they called themselves Economists. See OECONOMISTS. The
books, however, that were issued from this club were calculated to impair and
overturn religion, morals, and government; and which indeed, spreading over all
Europe, imperceptibly took possession of public opinion. As soon as the sale
was sufficient to pay the expenses, inferior editions were printed, and given
away or sold at a very low price; circulating libraries of them formed, and
reading societies instituted. While they constantly denied these productions to
the world, they contrived to give them a false celebrity through their
confidential agents, and correspondents, who were not themselves always trusted
with the entire secret. By degrees they got possession nearly of all the
reviews and periodical publications, established a general intercourse by means
of hawkers and pedlars with the distant provinces, and instituted an office to
supply all schools with teachers; and thus did they acquire unprecedented
dominion over every species of literature, over the minds of all ranks of
people, and over the education of youth, without giving any alarm to the world.
The lovers of wit and polite literature were caught by Voltaire; the men of
science were perverted, and children corrupted in the first rudiments of
learning, by D'Alembert and Diderto; stronger appetites were fed by the secret
club of Baron Holbach; the imaginations of the higher orders were set
dangerously afloat by Montesquieu; and th multitude of all ranks was surprised,
confounded and hurried away by Rousseau. Thus was the public mind in France
completely corrupted, and which, no doubt, greatly accelerated those dreadful
events which have since transpired in that country.
Properly denotes love, or desire of wisdom. Pythagoras was the first who devised this name, because he thought no man was wise, but God only; and that learned men ought rather to be considered as lovers of wisdom than really wise. 1. Natural philosophy is that art or science which leads us to contemplate the nature, causes, and effects of the material works of God.--2. Moral philosophy is the science of manners, the knowledge of our duty and felicity. The various articles included in the latter, are explained in their places in this work.
A sect of heretics, in the fourth century, who denied the divinity of our Lord. They derive their name from Photinius, their founder, who was bishop of Sermium, and a disciple of Marcellus. Photinius published in the year 343, his notions respecting the Deity, which were repugnant both to the orthodox and Arian systems. He asserted that Jesus Christ was born of the Holy Ghost and the Virgin Mary; that a certain divine emanation, which he called the Word, descended upon him: and that, because of the union of the Divine Word with his human nature, he was called the Son of God, and even God himself; and that the Holy Ghost was not a person, but merely a celestial virtue proceeding from the Deity.
Or CATAPHRYGIANS, a sect in the second century; so called, as being of the country of Phrygia. They were orthodox in every thing, setting aside this, that they took Montanus for a prophet, and Priscilla and Maximilla for true prophetesses, to be consulted in every thing relating to religion; as supposing the Holy Spirit had abandoned the church. See MONTANISTS.
In the general, was a name given by the ancients
to all kinds of charms, spells, or characters, which they wore about them, as
amulets, to preserve them from dangers or diseases.
Phylactery particularly denoted a slip of
parchment, wherein was written some text of holy Scripture, particularly of the
decalogue, which the more devout people among the Jews wore at the forehead,
the breast, or the neck, as a mark of their religion.
The primitive christians also gave the name
Phylacteries to the cases wherein they enclosed the relics of their dead.
Phylacteries are often mentioned in the New Testament, and appear to have been
very common among the Pharisees in our Lord's time.
A sect which arose in Bohemia, in the fifteenth
century. Picard, the author of this sect, from whom it derived its name, drew
after him, as has been generally said, a number of men and women, pretending he
would restore them to the primitive state of innocence wherein man was created;
and accordingly he assumed the title of New Adam. With this pretence, he
taught, to give themselves up to all impurity, saying, that therein consisted
the liberty of the sons of God, and all those not of their sect were in
bondage. He first published his notions in Germany and the Low Countries, and
persuaded many people to go naked, and gave them the name of Adamites. After
this, he seized on an island in the river Lausnecz, some leagues from Thabor,
the head-quarters of Zisca, where he fixed himself and his followers. His women
were common, but none were allowed to enjoy them without his permission; so
that when any man desired a particular woman, he carried her to Picard, who
gave him leave in these words: Go, increase, multiply, and fill the earth. At
length, however, Zisca, general of the Hussites (famous for his victories over
the emperor Sigismond,) hurt at their abominations, marched against them, made
himself master of their island, and put them all to death except two, whom he
spared, that he might learn their doctrine.
Such is the account which various writers,
relying on the authorities of AEaneas, Sylvius, and Varillas, have given of the
Picards. Some, however, doubt whether a sect of this denomination, chargeable
with such wild principles and such licentious conduct, ever existed. It appears
probable that the reproachful representations of the writers just mentioned,
were calumnies invented and propagated in order to disgrace the Picards, merely
because they deserted the communion, and protested against the errors of the
church of Rome, Lastitus informs us, that Picard, together with forty other
persons, besides women and children, settled in Bohemia, in the year 1418.
Balbinus, the Jesuit, in his Epitome Rerum Bohemicarum, lib. ii. gives a
similiar account, and charges on the Picards none of the extravagances or
crimes ascribed to them by Sylvius. Schlecta, secretary of Ladislaus, king of
Bohemia, in his letters to Erasmus, in which he gives a particular account of
the Picards, says, that they considered the pope, cardinals, and bishops of
Rome as the true antichrists; and the adorers of the consecrated elements in
the eucharist as downright idolaters; that they denied the corporeal presence
of Christ in this ordinance; that they condemned the worship of saints, prayers
for the dead, auricular confessions, the penance imposed by priests, the feasts
and vigils observed in the Romish church; and that they confined themselves to
the observance of the sabbath, and of the two great feasts of Christmas and
Pentecost. From this account it appears that they were no other than the
Vaudois that fled from persecution in their own country, and sought refuge in
Bohemia. M. De Beausobre has shown that they were both of the same sect, though
under different denominations.--Besides, it is certain that the Vaudois were
settled in Bohemia in the year 1178, where some of them adopted the rites of
the Greek, and others those of the Latin church. The former were pretty
generally adhered to till the middle of the fourteenth century, when the establishment
of the Latin rites caused great disturbance. On the commencement of the
national troubles in Bohemia, on account of the opposition of the papal power,
the Picards more publicly avowed and defended their religious opinions; and
they formed a considerable body in an island by the river Launitz, or Lausnecz,
in the district of Bechin, and, recurring to arms, were defeated by Zisca.
A religious sect that sprung up among the
Protestants in Germany in the latter end of the seventeenth century. Pietism
was set on foot by the pious and learned Spencer, who, by the private societies
he formed at Francfort with a design to promote vital religion, roused the
lukewarm from their indifference, and excited a spirit of vigour and resolution
in those who had been satisfied to lament in silence the progress of impiety.
The remarkable effect of these pious meetings was increased by a book he
published under the title of Pious Desires, in which he exhibited a striking
view of the disorders of the church, and proposed the remedies that were proper
to heal them. Many persons of good and upright intentions were highly pleased
both with the proceedings and writings of Spencer; and, indeed, the greatest
part of those who had the cause of virtue and practical religion truly at
heart, applauded the designs of this good man, though an apprehension of abuse
retained numbers from encouraging them openly. These abuses actually happened.
The remedies proposed by Spencer to heal the disorders of the church fell into
unskilful hands, were administered without sagacity or prudence, and thus, in
many cases, proved to be worse than the disease itself. Hence complaints arose
against these institutions of pietism, as if, under a striking appearance of
sanctity, they led the people into false notions of religion, and fomented in
those who were of a turbulent and violent character, the seeds and principles
of mutiny and sedition.
These complaints would have been undoubtedly hushed,
and the tumults they occasioned would have subsided by degrees, had not the
contests that arose at Leipsic in the year 1689, added fuel to the flame.
Certain pious and learned professors of philosophy, and particularly Franckius,
Schadius, and Paulus Antonius, the disciples of Spencer, who at that time was
ecclesiastical superintendent of the court of Saxony, began to consider with
attention the defects that prevailed in the ordinary method of instructing the
candidates for the ministry; and this review persuaded them of the necessity of
using their best endeavours to supply what was wanting, and correct what was
amiss. For this purpose they undertook to explain in their colleges certain
books of holy Scripture, in order to render these genuine sources of religious
knowledge better understood, and to promote a spirit of practical piety and
vital religion in the minds of their hearers. The novelty of this method drew
attention,, and rendered it singulary pleasing to many; accordingly, these
lectures were much frequented, and their effects were visible in the lives and
conversations of several persons, whom they seemed to inspire with a deep sense
of the importance of religion and virtue. Many things, however, it is said,
were done in these Biblical coleges (as they were called,) which, though they
may be looked upon by equitable and candid judges as worthy of toleration and
indulgence, were nevertheless, contrary to custom, and far from being
consistent with prudence. Hence rumours were spread, tumults excited,
animosities kindled, and the matter at length brought to a public trial, in
which the pious and learned men above-mentioned were, indeed, declared free
from the errors and heresies that had been laid to their charge, but were, at
the same time, prohibited from carrying on the plan of religious instruction
they had undertaken with such zeal. It was during these troubles and divisions
that the invidious denomination of Pietists was first invented; it may, at
least, be affirmed, that it was not commonly known before this period. It was
at first applied by some giddy and inconsiderate persons to those who
frequented the Biblical Colleges, and lived in a manner suitable to the
instructions and exhortations that were adressed to them in these seminaries of
piety. It was afterwards made use of to characterize all those who were either
distinguished by the excessive austerity of their manners, or who, regardless
of truth and opinion, were only intent upon practice, and turned the whole
vigour of their efforts towards the attainment of religious feelings and
habits. But as it is the fate of all those denominations by which peculiar
sects are distinguished, to be variously and often very improperly applied, so
the title of Pietists was frequently given in common conversation, to persons
of eminent wisdom and sanctity, who were equally remarkable for their adherence
to truth, and their love of piety; and, not seldom, to persons whose motley
characters exhibited an enormous mixture of prodigacy and enthusiasm, and who deserved
the title of delirious fanatics better than any other denomination.
This contest was by no means confined to Leipsic,
but spread with incredible celerity through all the Lutheran churches in the
different states and kingdoms of Europe. for from this time, in all the cities,
towns, and villages, where Lutheranism was professed, there started up, all of
a sudden, persons of various ranks and professions, of both sexes, who declared
that they were called by a divine impulse, to pull up iniquity by the root; to
restore to its primitive lustre, and propagate through the world the declining
cause of piety and virtue; to govern the church of Christ by wiser rules than
those by which it was at present directed; and who, partly in their writings,
and partly in their private and public discourses, pointed out the means and
measures that were necessary to bring about this important revolution. Several
religious societies were formed in various places, which, though they differed
in some circumstances, and were not all conducted and composed with equal
wisdom, piety, and prudence, were, however, designed to promote the same
general purpose. In the mean time, these unusual proceedings filled with uneasy
and alarming apprehensions both those who were intrusted with the government of
the church, and those who sat at the helm of the state. these apprehensions
were justified by this important consideration, that the pious and well-meaning
persons who composed these assemblies, had indiscreetly admitted into their community
a parcel of extravagant and hot-headed fanatics, who foretold the approaching
destruction of Babel (by which they meant the Lutheran church,) terrified the
populace with fictitious visions, assumed the authority of prophets honoured
with a divine commission, obscured the sublime truths of religion by a gloomy
kind of jargon of their own invention, and revived doctrines that had long
before been condemned by the church. The most violent debates arose in all the
Lutheran churches; and persons whose differences were occasioned rather by mere
words and questions of little consequence, than by any doctrines or
institutions of considerable importance, attacked one another with the
bitterest animosity; and, in many countries, severe laws were at length enacted
against the Pietists.
These revivers of piety were of two kinds, who,
by their different manner of proceeding, deserve to be placed in two distinct
classes. One sect of these practical reformers proposed to carry on their plan
without introducing any change into the doctrine, discipline, or form of
government, that were established in the Lutheran church. The other maintained,
on the contrary, that it was impossible to promote the progress of real piety
among the Lutherans without making considerable alterations in their doctrine,
and changing the whole form of their ecclesiastical discipline and polity. The
former had at their head the learned and pious Spencer, who, in the year 1691,
removed from Dresden to Berlin, and whose sentiments were adopted by the
professors of the new academy of Hal; and particularly by Franckius and Paulus
Antoninus, who had been invited thither from Leipsic, where they began to be
suspected of pietism. Though few pretended to treat either with indignation or
contempt, the intentions and purposes of these good men (which indeed, none
could despise without affecting to appear the enemy of practical religion and
virtue,) yet many eminent divines, and more especially the professors and
pastors of Wittenberg, were of opinion, that, in the execution of this laudable
purpose, several maxims were adopted, and certain measures employed, that were
prejudicial to the truth, and also detrimental to the interests of the church.
Hence they looked on themselves as obliged to proceed publicly against Spencer,
in the year 1695, and afterwards against his disciples and adherents, as the
inventors and promoters of erroneous and dangerous opinions. These debates are
of a recent date; so that those who are desirous of knowing more particularly
how far the principles of equity, moderation, and candour, influenced the minds
and directed the conduct of the contending parties, may easily receive
satisfactory information. These debates turned upon a variety of points, and
therefore the matter of them cannot be comprehended under any one general head.
If we consider them, indeed, in relation to their origin, and the circumstances
that gave rise to them, we shall then be able to reduce them to some fixed
principles. It is well known, that those who had the advancement of piety most
zealously at heart, were possessed of a notion that no order of men contributed
more to retard its progress than the clergy, whose peculiar vocation it was to
inculcate and promote it. Looking upon this as the root of the evil, it was but
natural that their plans of reformation should begin here; and accordingly,
they laid it down as an essential principle that none should be admitted into
the ministry but such as had received a proper education, were distinguished by
their wisdom and sanctity of manners, and had hearts filled with divine love.
Hence they proposed, in the first place, a thorough reformation of the schools
of divinity; and they explained clearly enough what they meant by this
reformation, which consisted in the following points: That the systematic
theology which reigned in the academies, and was composed of intricate and
disputable doctrines, and obscure and unusual forms of expression, should be
totally abolished; that polemical divinity, which comprehended the
controversies subsisting between Christians of different communions, should be
less eagerly studied, and less frequently treated, though not entirely
neglected; that all mixture of philosophy and human learning with divine
wisdom, was to be most carefully avoided; that, on the contrary, all those who
were designed for the ministry, should be accustomed from their early youth to
the perusal and study of the holy Scriptures; that they should be taught a
plain system of theology, drawn from these unerring sources of truth; and that
the whole course of their education was to be so directed as to render them
useful in life, by the practical power of their doctrine, and the commanding
influence of their example. As these maxims were propagated with the greatest industry
and zeal, and were explained inadvertently, by some, without those restrictions
which prudence seemed to require, these professed patrons and revivers of piety
were suspected of designs that could not but render them obnoxious to censure.
They were supposed to despise philosophy and learning; to treat with
indifference, and even to renounce, all inquiries into the nature and
foundations of religious truth; to disapprove of the zeal and labours of those
who defended it against such as either corrupted or opposed it; and to place
the whole of their theology in certain vague and incoherent declamations
concerning the duties of morality. Hence arose those famous disputes concerning
the use of philosophy; and the value of human learning, considered in connexion
with the interest of religion, the dignity and usefulness of systematic
theology, the necessity of polemic divinity, the excellence of the mystic
system, and also concerning the true method of instructing the people.
The second great object that employed the zeal
and attention of the persons now under consideration, was, that the candidates
for the ministry should not only for the future receive such an academical
education as would tend rather to solid utility than to mere speculation, but also
that they should dedicate themselves to God in a peculiar manner, and exhibit
the most striking examples of piety and virtue. This maxim, which, when
considered in itself, must be considered to be highly laudable, not only gave
occasion to several new regulations, designed to restrain the passions of the
studious youth, to inspire them with pious sentiments and to excite in them
holy resolutions, but also produced another maxim, which was a lasting source
of controversy and debate, viz. "That no person that was not himself a
model of piety and divine love, was qualified to be a public teacher of piety,
or a guide to others in the way of salvation." This opinion was considered
by many as derogatory from the power and efficacy of the word of God, which
cannot be deprived of its divine influence by the vices of its ministers; and
as a sort of revival of the long-exploded errors of the Donatists: and what
rendered in peculiarly liable to an interpretation of this nature, was the
imprudence of some Pietists, who inculcated and explained it without those
restrictions that were necessary to render it unexceptionable. Hence arose
endless and intricate debates concerning the following questions: "Whether
the religious knowledge acquired by a wicked man can be termed theology?"
"Whether a vicious person can, in effect,attain a true knowledge of
religion?" "How far the office and ministry of an impious
ecclesiastic can be pronounced salutary and efficacious?" "Whether a
licentious and ungodly man cannot be susceptible of illumination?" and
other questions of a like nature.
These revivers of declining piety went still
farther. In order to render the ministry of their pastors as successful as
possible in rousing men from their indolence, and in stemming the torrent of
corruption and immorality, they judged two things indispensably necessary. The
first was, to suppress entirely, in the course of public instruction, and more
especially in that delivered from the pulpit, certain maxims in phrases which
the corruption of men leads them frequently to interpret in a manner favourable
to the indulgence of their passions. Such, in the judgment of the Pietists,
were the following propositions: No man is able to attain to that perfection
which the divine law requires: Good works are not necessary to salvation: In
the act of justification, on the part of man, faith alone is concerned, without
good works. The second step they took in order to give efficacy to their plans
of reformation, was, to form new rules of life and manners, much more rigorous
and austere than those that had been formerly practised; and to place in the
class of sinful and unlawful gratifications, several kinds of pleasure and
amusement which had hitherto been looked upon as innocent in themselves, and
which could only become god or evil in consequence of that respective
characters of those who used them with prudence, or abused them with
intemperance. Thus, dancing, pantomimes, public sports, theatrical diversions,
the reading of humorous and comical books, with several other kinds of pleasure
and entertainment, were prohibited by the Pietists as unlawful and unseemly,
and therefore by no means of an indifferent nature. The third thing on which
the Pietists insisted, was, that, besides the stated meetings for public
worship, private assemblies should be held for prayer and other religious
exercises.
The other class of Pietists already mentioned,
whose reforming, views extended to far as to change the system of doctrine, and
the form of ecclesiastical government that were established in the Lutheran
church, comprehended persons of various characters, and different ways of
thinking. Some of them were totally destitute of judgment; their errors were
the reveries of a disordered brain; and they were rather considered as lunatics
than as heretics. Others were less extravagant, and tempered the singular
notions they had derived from reading or meditation, with a certain mixture of
the important truths and doctrines of religion.
So far Mosheim, whose account of the Pietists
seems to have been drawn up with a degree of severity. Indeed, he represents
the real character of Franck and his colleagues as regardless of truth and
opinion. A more recent historian, however, (Dr. Haweis,) observes, "that
no men more rigidly contended for, or taught mere explicitly the fundamental
doctrines of Christianity: from all I have read or known, I am disposed to
believe they were remarkably amiable in their behavior, kind in their spirit,
and compassionate to the feeble-minded."
Consists in a firm belief, and in right
conceptions of the being, perfections, and providence of God; with suitable
affections to him, resemblance of his moral perfections, and a constant
obedience to his will. the different articles included in this definition, such
as knowledge, veneration, love, resignation, &c. are explained in their
proper places in this work.
We shall, however, present the reader with a few
ideas on the subject of early piety; a subject of infinite importance, and
which we beg our young readers especially to regard. "Youth," says
Mr. Jay, "is a period which presents the fewest obstacles to the practice
of godliness, whether we consider out external circumstances, our nature,
powers, or our moral habits. In that season we are most free from those
troubles which imbitter, those schemes which engross, those engagements which
hinder us in more advanced in connected life. Then the body possessed health
and strength; the memory is receptive and tenacious; the fancy glows; the mind
is lively and vigorous; the understanding is more docile; the affections are
more easily touched and moved: we are more accessible to the influence of joy
and sorrow, hope and fear: we engage in an enterprise with more expectation,
and ardour, and zeal. Under the legal oeconomy, the first was to be chosen for
God; the first-born of man, the first-born of beasts, the first-fruits of the
field. It was an honour becoming the God they worshipped, to serve him first.
This duty the young alone can spiritualized the fulfil, by giving Him who
deserves all their lives the first-born of their days, and the first-fruits of
their reason and their affection: and never have they such an opportunity to
prove the goodness of their motives as they then possess. See an old man: what
does he offer? His riches? but he can use them no longer. His pleasures? but he
can enjoy them no longer. His honour? but it is withered on his brow. His
authority? but it has dropped from his feeble hand. He leaves his sins; but it
is because they will no longer bear him company. He flies from the world; but
it is because he is burnt out. He enters the temple; but it is as a sanctuary;
it is only to take hold of the horns of the altar; it is a refuge, not a place
of devotion he seeks. But they who consecrate to him their youth, they do not
profanely tell him to suspend his claims till the rest are served, till they
have satisfied the world and the flesh, his degrading rivals. They do not send
him forth to gather among the stubble the gleanings of life, after the enemy
has secured the harvest. They are not like those, who, if they reach Immanuel's
land, are forced thither by shipwreck: they sail thither by intention.
"Consider the beneficial influence of early
piety over the remainder of our days. Youth is the spring of life, and by this
will be determined the glory of summer, the abundance of autumn, the provision
of winter. It is the morning of life, and if the sun of righteousness does not
dispel the moral mists and fogs before noon, the whole day generally remains
overspread and gloomy. Piety in youth will have a god influence over out
bodies; it will preserve them from disease and deformity. Sin variously tends
to the injury of health; and often by intemperance the constitution is so
impaired, that late religion is unable to restore what early religion would
have prevented. Early piety from all those dangers to which we are exposed n a
season of life the most perilous. Conceive of a youth entering a world like
this, destitute of the presiding governing care of religion, his passions high,
his prudence weak, impatient, rash, confident, without experience; a thousand a
venues of seduction opening around him, and a serene voice singing at the
entrance of each; pleased with appearances, and embracing them for realities,
joined by evil company, and ensnared by erroneous publications: these hazards
exceed all the alarm I can give. How necessary, therefore, that we should trust
in the Lord with all out hearts, and lean not to our own understanding; but in
all our ways acknowledge him, that he may direct our paths!
"Early piety will have a beneficial
influence in forming our connexions, and establishing our plans for life. It
will teach us to ask counsel of the Lord, and arrange all under the
superintendency of scripture. Those changes which a person who becomes
religious in manhood is obliged to make, are always very embarrassing. With
what difficulty do some good men establish family worship, after living in the
view of children and servants, so long in the neglect of it!--but this would
have been avoided, had they early followed the example of Joshua: 'As for me
and my house we will serve the Lord.' How hard is it to disentangle ourselves
from associates with whom we have been long familiar, and who have proved a
snare to our souls! Some evils, indeed, are remediless; persons have formed
alliances which they cannot dissolve: but they did not walk by the rule, 'Be ye
not unequally yoked together with unbelievers:' they are now wedded to miscry
all their days; and repentance, instead of visiting them like a faithful
friend, to chide them when they do wrong, and withdraw, is quartered upon them
for life. An early dedication to God, therefore, renders a religious life more
easy, pleasant, and safe. It is of unspeakable advantage also under the
calamities of life. It turns the curse into a blessing; it enters the house of
mourning, and soothes the troubled mind; it prepares us for all, sustains us in
all, sanctifies us by all, and delivers us from all. Finally, it will bless old
age: we shall look back with pleasure on some instances of usefulness; to some
poor traveller, to whom we have been a refreshing stream; some deluded wanderer
we guided into the path of peace. We shall look forward, and see the God who has
guided us with his counsel, and be enabled to say, 'Henceforth there is laid up
for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, shall
give me at that day; and not to me only, but unto all them that love his
appearing.'" Jay's Ser. vol. i. ser. 5; Jennings's Evans's, Doddridge's
Jerment's and Thornton's Sermons to Young People; Bryson's Address to Youth.
One who travels through foreign countries to visit holy places, and to pay his devotion to the relics of dead saints. The word is formed from the Flemish Pelgrim, or Italian, pelegrino, which signifies the same; and those originally from the Latin peregrinus, a stranger or traveller.
A kind of religious discipline, which consists
in taking a journey to some holy place, in order to adore the relics of some
deceased saint. Pilgrimages began to be made about the middle ages of the
church, but they were most in vogue after the end of the eleventh century, when
every one was for visiting places of devotion, not excepting kings and princes;
and even bishops made no difficulty of being absent from their churches on the
same account. The places most visited were Jerusalem, Rome, Tours, and
Compostella. As to the latter place, we find that in the year 1428, under the
reign of Henry VI. abundance of licences were granted by the crown of England
to captains of English ships, for carrying numbers of devout persons thither to
the shrine of St. James's; provided, however, that those pilgrims should first
take an oath not to take any thing prejudicial to England, nor to reveal any of
its secrets, nor to carry out with them any more gold or silver than what would
be sufficient for their reasonable expenses. In this year there went thither
from England on the said pilgrimage, the following number of persons: from
London 280, Bristol 200, Weymouth 122, Dartmouth 90, Yarmouth 60, Jersey 60,
Plymouth 40, Exeter 30, Poole 24, Ipswich 20; in all, 926 persons. Of late
years the greatest numbers have resorted to Loretto, in order to visit the
chamber of the Blessed Virgin, in which she was born, and brought up her son
Jesus till he was twelve years of age.
In almost every country where popery has been
established, pilgrimages have been common. In England, the shrine of St.
Thomas-Becket was the chief resort of the pious, and in Scotland, St. Andrews,
where, as tradition informs us, was deposited a leg of the holy apostle. In
Ireland they have been continued even down to modern times; for from the
beginning of May till the middle of August every year crowds of popish
penitents from all parts of that country resort to an island near the centre of
the Lough Fin, or White Lake, in the county of Donegal, to the amount of 3000
or 4000. these are mostly of the poorer sort, and many of them are proxies, for
those who are richer; some of whom, however, together with some of the priests
and bishops on occasion, make their appearance there. When the pilgrim comes
within sight of the holy lake, he must uncover his hands and feet, and thus
walk to the water side, and is taken to the island for sixpence. Here there are
two chapels and fifteen other houses; to which are added confessionals so
contrived, that the priest cannot see the person confessing. The penance varies
according to the circumstances of the penitent; during the continuance of which
(which is sometimes three, six, or nine days) he subsists on oatmeal, sometimes
made into bread. He traverses sharp stones on his bare knees or feet, and goes
through a variety of other forms, paying sixpence at every different
confession. When all is over, the priest bores a gimblet hole through the top
of the pilgrim's staff, in which he fastens a cross peg; gives him as many holy
pebbles out of the lake as he cares to carry away, for amulets to be presented
to his friends, and so dismisses him an object of veneration to all other
Papists not thus initiated; who no sooner see the pilgrim's cross in his hands,
than they kneel down to get his blessing.
There are, however, it is said, other parts of
Ireland sacred to extraordinary worship and pilgrimage; and the number of holy
wells, and miraculous cures, &c. produced by them, are very great. That
such things should exist in this enlightened age, and in a protestant country,
is indeed strange; but our wonder ceases when we reflect it is among the
lowest, and perhaps the worst of the people. Pilgrimage, however, is not
peculiar to Roman catholic countries. the Mahometans place a great part of
their religion in it. Mecca is the grand place to which they go; and this
pilgrimage is so necessary a point of practice, that, according to a tradition
of Mahomet, he who dies without performing it, may as well die a Jew or a Christian;
and the same is expressly commanded in the Koran.
What is principally reverenced in this place, and
gives sanctity to the whole, is a square stone building, called the Caaba.
Before the time of Mahomet this temple was a place of worship for the idolatrous
Arabs, and is said to have contained no less than three hundred and sixty
different images, equalling in number the days of the Arabian year. They were
all destroyed by Mahomet, who sanctified the Caaba, and appointed it to be the
chief place of worship for all true believers. The Mussulment pay so great a
veneration to it, that they believe a single sight of its sacred walls, without
any particular act of devotion, is as meritorious in the sight of God as the
most careful discharge of one's duty for the space of a whole year, in any
other temple.
To this temple every Mahometan who has health and
means sufficient, ought once, at least, in his life, to go on pilgrimage; nor
are women excused from the performance of this duty. the pilgrims meet at
different laces near Mecca, according to the different parts from whence they
come, during the months of Shawal and Dhu'lkaada, being obliged to be there by
the beginning of Dhu'lhajja; which month, as its name imports, is peculiarly
set apart for the celebration of this solemnity.
The men put on the Ibram, or sacred habit, which
consists only of two woollen wrappers, one wrapped about the middle, and the
other thrown over their shoulders, having their heads bare, and a kind of
slippers which cover neither the heel nor the instep, and so enter the sacred
territory in their way to Mecca. While they have this habit on, they must
neither hunt nor fowl (though they are allowed to fish;) which precept is so
punctually observed, that they will not kill vermin if they find them on their
bodies: there are some noxious animals, however, which they have permission to
kill during the pilgrimage; as kites, ravens, scorpions, mice, and dogs given
to bite. During the pilgrimage, it behoves a man to have a constant guard over
his words and actions; to avoid all quarrelling or ill language, all converse
with women, and all obscene discourse; and to apply his whole attention to the
good work he is engaged in.
The pilgrims being arrived at Mecca, immediately
visit the temple, and then enter on the performance of the prescribed
ceremonies, which consists chiefly in going in procession round the Caaba, in
running between the mounts Safa and Meriva, in making the station on mount
Arafat, and slaying the victims and shaving their heads in the valley of Mina.
In compassing the Caaba, which they do seven
times, beginning at the corner where the black stone is fixed, they use a
short, quick pace the first three times they go round it, and a grave ordinary
pace the four last; which it is said is ordered by Mahomet, that his followers
might show themselves strong and active, to cut off the hopes of the infidels,
who gave out that the immoderate heats of Medina had rendered them weak. But
the aforesaid quick pace they are not obliged to use every time they perform
this piece of devotion, but only at some particular times. So often as they
pass by the black stone, they either kiss it, or touch it with their hand, and
kiss that.
The running between Safa and Meriva is also
performed seven times, partly with a slow pace, and partly running; for they
walk gravely till they come to a place between two pillars; and there they run,
and afterwards walk again, sometimes looking back, and sometimes stoping, like
one who had lost something, to represent Hagar seeking water for her son; for
the ceremony is said to be as ancient as her time.
On the ninth of Dhu'lhajja, after morning prayer,
the pilgrims leave the valley of Mina whither they come the day before, and
proceed in a tumultuous and rushing manner to mount Arafat, where they stay to
perform their devotions till sun-set; then they go to Mozdalifa, and oratory
between Arafat, and Mina, and there spend the night in prayer and reading the
Koran. The next morning by day-break they visit Al Masher al Karam, or the
sacred monument; and, departing thence before sun-rise, haste by Batn Mohasser
to the valley of Mina, where they throw seven stones at three marks or pillars,
in imitation of Abraham, who, meeting the devil in that place, and being by him
disturbed in his devotions, or tempted to disobedience when he was going to
sacrifice his son, was commanded by God to drive him away by throwing stones at
him; though others pretend this rite to be as old as Adam, who also put the devil
to flight in the same place, and by the same means.
The ceremony being over, on the same day, the
tenth of Dhu'lhajja, the pilgrims slay their victims in the said valley of
Mina, of which they and their friends eat part, and the rest is given to the
poor. These victims must be either sheep, goats, kine, or camels; males, if of
either of the two former kinds, and females if of either of the latter, and of
a fit age. The sacrifices being over, they shave their heads and cut their
nails, burying them in the same place; after which the pilgrimage is looked on
as completed, though they again visit the Caaba, to take their leave of that
sacred building.
Dr. Johnson gives us some observations on
pilgrimage, which are so much to the purpose, that we shall here present them
to the reader. "Pilgrimage, like many other acts of piety, may be
reasonable or superstitious according to the principles upon which it is
performed. Long journeys in search of truth are not commanded: truth, such as
is necessary to the regulation of life, is always found where it is honestly
sought, change of place is no natural cause of the increase of piety, for it
inevitably produces dissipation of mind. Yet, since men go every day to view
the fields where great actions have been performed, and return with stronger
impressions of the event, curiosity of the same kind may naturally dispose us
to view that country whence our religion had its beginning. That the Supreme
Being may be more easily propitiated in one place than in another, is the dream
of idle superstition; but that some places may operate upon our own minds in an
uncommon manner, is an opinion which hourly experience will justify. He who
supposes that his vices may be more successfully combated in Palestine, will,
perhaps, find himself mistaken; yet he may go thither without folly: he who
thinks they will be more freely pardoned, dishonours at once his reason and his
religion." Johnson's Rasselas; Enc. Brit. Hume's Hist. of England. See
CRUSADE.
Poor Pilgrims, an order that started up in the
year 1500. They came out of Italy into Germany bare-footed, and bare-headed,
feeding all the week, except on Sundays, upon herbs and roots sprinkled with
salt. They stayed not above twenty-four hours in a place. They went by couples
begging from door to door. This penance they undertook voluntarily, some for
three, others for five or seven years, as they pleased, and then returned home
to their callings.
Are those artifices and falsehoods made use of in propagating the truth, and endeavouring to promote the spiritual interests of mankind. These have been more particularly practised in the church of Rome, and considered not only as innocent, but commendable. Neither the term nor the thing signified, however, can be justified. The terms pious and fraud form a solecism; and the practice of doing evil that good may come, is directly opposite to the injunction of the sacred Scriptures, Rom. iii. 8.
Is generally defined to be the uneasiness we
feel at the unhappiness of another, prompting us to compassionate them, with a
desire of their relief.
God is said to pity them that fear him, as a
father pitieth his children. The father, says Mr. Henry, pities his children
that are weak in knowledge, and instructs them; pities them when they are
froward, and bears with them; pities them when they are sick, and comforts
them, Isa. lxvi. 13; when they are fallen, and helps them up again; when they
have offended, and forgives them; when they are wronged, and rights them. Thus
the Lord pitieth them that fear him. Ps. ciii. 13. See COMPASSION OF GOD.
An absurd doctrine, which some have thus described, "It is an incorporeal created substance endued with a vegetative life, but not with sensation or thought; penetrating the whole created universe, being co-extended with it; and, under God, moving matter, so as to produce the phaenomena which cannot be solved by mechanical laws: active for ends unknown to itself, not being expressly conscious of its actions, and yet having an obscure idea of the action to be entered upon." To this it has been answered, that, as the idea itself is most obscure, and, indeed, inconsistent, so the foundation of it is evidently weak. It is intended by this to avoid the inconveniency of subjecting God to the trouble of some changes in the created world, and the meanness of others. But it appears, that, even upon this hypothesis, he would still be the author of them; besides, that to Omnipotence nothing is troublesome, nor those things mean, when considered as part of a system, which alone might appear to be so. Doddridge's Lect. lec. 37; Cudworth's Intellectual Syst. p. 149, 172; More's Immor. of the Soul, l. iii. c. 12; Ray's Wisdom of God, p. 51, 52; Lord Manboddo's Ancient Netaphysics; Young's Essay on the Powers and Mechanism of Nature.
See NEW PLATONICS.
The delight which arises in the mind from contemplation or enjoyment of something agreeable. See HAPPINESS.
See INSPIRATION.
One that holds more than one ecclesiastical benefice with cure of souls. Episcopalians contend there is no impropriety in a presbyter holding more than one ecclesiastical benefice. Others, on the contrary, affirm that this practice is exactly the reverse of the primitive churches, as well as the instructions of the apostle, Tit. i. 5. Instead of a plurality of churches to one pastor, they say, we ought to have a plurality of pastors to one church, Acts. xiv. 23.
The doctrine of spiritual existence. See SOUL.
See SOCINIANS.
The state of having more wives than one at once.
Though this article, (like some others we have inserted,) cannot be considered
as strictly theological, yet, as it is a subject of importance to society, we
shall here introduce it. The circumstances of the patriarchs living in
polygamy, and their not being reproved for it, has given occasion for some
modern writers to suppose that it is not unlawful: but it is answered that the
equality in the number of males and females born into the world intimates the
intention of God that one woman should be assigned to one man; "for (says
Dr. Paley) if to one man be allowed an exclusive right to five or more women,
four or more men must be deprived of the exclusive possession of any; which
could never be the order intended. This equality, indeed, is not quite exact.
The number of male infants exceeds that of females in the proportion of 19 to
18, or thereabouts; but this excess provides for the greater consumption of males
by war, seafaring, and other dangerous or unhealthy occupations. It seems also
a significant indication of the divine will, that he at first created only one
woman to one man. Had God intended polygamy for the species, it is probable he
would have begun with it; especially as by giving to Adam more wives than one,
the multiplication of the human race would have proceeded with a quicker
progress. Polygamy not only violates the constitution of nature, and the
apparent design of the Deity, but produces to the parties themselves, and to
the public, the following bad effects: contests and jealousies amongst the
wives of the same husband; distracted affections, or the loss of all affection
in the husband himself: a voluptuousness in the rich which dissolves the vigour
of their intellectual as well as active faculties, producing that indolence and
imbecility, both of mind and body, which have long characterized the nations of
the East; the abasement of one half of the human species, who, in countries
where polygamy obtains, are degraded into instruments of physical pleasure to
the other half; neglect of children; and the manifold and sometimes unnatural
mischiefs which arise from a scarcity of women. To compensate for these evils,
polygamy does not offer a single advantage. In the article of population, which
it has been thought to promote, the community gain nothing (nothing, I mean,
compared with a state in which marriage is nearly universal;) for the question
is not, whether one man will have more children by five or more wives than by
one; but whether these five wives would not bear the same or a greater number
of children to five separate husbands. And as to the care of children when
produced, and the sending of them into the world in situations in which they may
be likely to form and bring up families of their own, upon which the increase
and succession of the human species in a great degree depend, this is less
provided for and less practicable, where twenty or thirty children are to be
supported by the attention and fortunes of one father, than if they were
divided into five or six families, to each of which were assigned the industry
and inheritance of two parents. Whether simultaneous polygamy was permitted by
the law of Moses, seems doubtful, Deut. xvii. 16. Deut. xxi. 15; but whether
permitted or not, it was certainly practised by the Jewish patriarchs both
before that law and under it. the permission, if there were any, might be like
that of divorce, "for the hardness of their heart," in condescension
to their established indulgences, rather than from the general rectitude or
propriety of the thing itself.
The state of manners in Judea had probably
undergone a reformation in this respect before the time of Christ; for in the
New Testament we meet with no trace or mention of any such practice being
tolerated. For which reason, and because it was likewise forbidden amongst the
Greeks and Romans, we cannot expect to find any express law upon the subject in
the Christian code. The words of Christ, Matt. xix. 9. may be construed by an
easy implication to prohibit polygamy; for if "whoever putteth away his
wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery;" he who marrieth another
without putting away the first is no less guilty of adultery; because the
adultery does not consist in the repudiation of the first wife (for however
unjust or cruel that may be, it is not adultery,) but entering into a second
marriage during the legal existence and obligation of the first. The several
passages in St. Paul's writings which speak of marriage, always suppose it to
signify the union of one man with one woman, Rom. vii. 2,3. 1 Cor. vii. 12, 14,
16. the manners of different countries have varied in nothing more than in
their domestic constitutions. Less polished and more luxurious nations have
either not perceived the bad effects of polygamy, or, if they did perceive
them, they who in such countries possessed the power of reforming the laws,
have been unwilling to resign their own gratifications. Polygamy is retained at
this day among the Turks, and throughout every part of Asia in which
Christianity is not professed. In Christian countries it is universally
prohibited. In Sweden it is punished with death. In England, besides the
nullity of the second marriage, it subjects the offender to transportation or
imprisonment and branding for the first offence, and to capital punishment for
the second. And whatever may be said in behalf of polygamy, when it is
authorized by the law of the land, the marriage of a second wife, during the
life-time of the first, in countries where such a second marriage is void, must
be ranked with the most dangerous and cruel of those frauds by which a woman is
cheated out of her fortune, her person, and her happiness." Thus far Dr.
Paley. We shall close this article with the words of an excellent writer on the
same side of the subject.
"When we reflect," says he, "that
the primitive institution of marriage limited it to one man and one woman; that
this institution was adhered to by Noah and his sons, amidst the degeneracy of
the age in which they lived, and in spite of the examples of polygamy which the
accursed race of Cain had introduced; when we consider how very few
(comparatively speaking) the examples of this practice were among the faithful;
how much it brought its own punishment with it; and how dubious and equivocal
those passages are in which it appears to have the sanction of the divine
approbation; when to these reflections we add another, respecting the limited
views and temporary nature of the more ancient dispensations and institutions
of religion--how often the imperfections and even vices of the patriarchs and
people of God in old times are recorded, without any express notification of
their criminality--how much is said to be commanded, which our reverence for
the holiness of God and his law will only suffer us to suppose were for wise
ends permitted; how frequently the messengers of god adapted themselves to the
genius of the people to whom they were sent, and the circumstances of the times
in which they lived; above all, when we consider the purity, equity, and
benevolence of the Christian law, the explicit declaration of our Lord and his
apostle Paul respecting the institution of marriage, its design and limitation;
when we reflect, too, on the testimony of the most ancient fathers, who could
not possibly be ignorant of the general and common practice of the apostolic
church; and, finally, when to these considerations we add those which are
founded on justice to the female sex, and all the regulations of domestic
aeconomy and national policy, we must wholly condemn the revival of
polygamy." Paley's Moral Philosophy, vol. i. p. 319 to 325; Madan's
Thelyphthora; Towers's Wills's, Penn's, R. Hill's, Palmer's and Howeis's
answers to Madan, Mon. Rev. vol. lxiii. p. 338, and also vol. lxix; Beattie's
El. of Mor. Science, vol. ii. p. 127-129.
Having many languages. For the more commodious comparison of different versions of the Scriptures, they have been sometimes joined together, and called Polyglot Bibles. Origen arranged in different columns a Hebrew copy, both in Hebrew and Greek characters, with six different Greek versions. Elias Hutter, a German, about the end of the sixteenth century, published the New Testament in twelve languages, viz. Greek, Hebrew, Syriac, Latin, Italian, Spanish, French, German, Bohemian, English, Danish, Polish; and the whole Bible in Hebrew, Chaldaic, Greek, Latin, German, and a varied version. But the most esteemed collections are those in which the originals and ancient translations are conjoined; such as the Complutensian Bible, by cardinal Ximencs, a Spaniard; the king of Spain's Bible, directed by Montamis, &c. the Paris Bible of Michael Jay, a French gentleman, in ten huge volumes, folio, copies of which were published in Holland under the name of pope Alexander the Seventh; and that of Brian Walton, afterwards bishop of Chester. The last is the most regular and valuable. It contains the Hebrew and Greek originals, with Montanus's interlineary version; the Chaldee paraphrases, the Septuagint, the Samaritan Pentateuch, the Syrian and Arabic Bibles, the Persian Pentateuch and Gospels, the Ethiopian Psalms, Song of Solomon, and New Testament, with their respective Latin translations; together with the Latin Vulgate, and a large volume of various readings, to which is ordinarily joined Castel's Heptaglot Lexicon. See BIBLE, No. 29, 30.
The doctrine of a plurality of gods, or
invisible powers superior to man.
"That there exists beings, one or many,
powerful above the human race, is a proposition," says lord Kaims,
"universally admitted as true in all ages and among all nations. I boldly
call it universal, notwithstanding what is reported of some gross savages; for
reports that contradict what is acknowledged to be general among men, require
more able vouchers than a few illiterate voyagers. Among many savage tribes
there are no words but for objects of external sense: is it surprising that
such people are incapable of expressing their religious perceptions, or any
perception of internal sense? The conviction that men have of superior powers,
in every country where there are words to express it, is so well vouched, that,
in fair reasoning, it ought to be taken for granted among the few tribes where
language is deficient." The same ingenious author allows, with great
strength of reasoning, that the operations of nature and the government of this
world, which to us loudly proclaim the existence of a Deity, are not sufficient
to account for the universal belief of superior beings among savage tribes. He
is therefore of opinion that this universality of conviction can spring only
from the image of Deity stamped upon the mind of every human being, the
ignorant equal with the learned. This, he thinks, may be termed the sense of
Deity.
This sense of Deity, however, is objected to by
others, who thus reason: All nations, except the Jews, were once polytheists
and idolaters. If, therefore, his lordship's hypothesis be admitted, either the
doctrine of polytheism must be true theology, or the instinct or sense is of
such a nature as to have, at different periods of the world, misled all mankind.
All savage tribes are at present polythesists and idolaters; but among savages
every instinct appears in greater parity and vigour than among people polished
by arts and sciences; the instinct or primary impression of nature which gives
rise to self-love, affection between the sexes, &c. has, in all nations and
in every period of time, a precise and determinate object, which it inflexibly
pursues. How, then, comes it to pass that this particular instinct, which, if
real, is surely of as much importance as any other, should have uniformly led
those who had no other guide, to pursue improper objects, to fall into the
grossest errors, and the most pernicious practices?
For these and other reasons, which might easily
be assigned, they suppose that the first religious principles must have been
derived from a source different as well from internal sense as from the
deductions of reason; from a source which the majority of mankind had early
forgotten: and which, when it was banished from their minds, left nothing
behind it to prevent the very first principle of religion from being perverted
by various accidents or causes; or, in some extraordinary concurrence of
circumstances, from being, perhaps, entirely obliterated. This source of
religion every consistent theist must believe to be revelation. Reason could
not have introduced savages to the knowledge of God, and we have just seen that
a sense of Deity is clogged with insuperable difficulties. Yet it is undeniable
that all mankind have believed in superior invisible powers; and, if reason and
instinct be set aside, there remains no other origin of this universal belief
than primeval revelation corrupted, indeed, as it passed from father to son in
the course of many generations. It is no slight support to this doctrine, that,
if there really be a Deity, it is highly presumable that he would reveal
himself to the first men; creatures whom he had formed with faculties to adore
and to worship him. To other animals the knowledge of the Deity is of no
importance, to man it is of the first importance. Were we totally ignorant of a
Deity, this world would appear to us a mere chaos. Under the government of a
wise and benevolent Deity, chance is excluded, and every event appears to be
the result of established laws. Good men submit to whatever happens without
repining, knowing that every event is ordered by Divine Providence: they submit
with entire resignation; and such resignation is a sovereign balsam for every
misfortune or evil in life.
As to the circumstances which led to polytheism,
it has been observed, that taking it for granted that our original progenitors
were instructed by their Creator in the truths of genuine theism, there is no
room to doubt but that those truths would be conveyed pure from father to son as
long as the race lived in one family, and were not spread over a large extent
of country. If any credit is due to the records of antiquity, the primeval
inhabitants of this globe lived to so great an age, that they must have
increased to a very large number long before the death of the common parent,
who would of course, be the bond of union to the whole society; and whose
dictates, especially is what related to the origin of his being, and the
existence of his Creator, would be listened to with the utmost respect by every
individual of his numerous progeny. Many causes, however, would conspire to
dissolve this family, after the death of its ancestor, into separate and
independent tribes, of which some would be driven by violence, or would
voluntarily wander in a distance from the rest. From this dispersion great
changes would take place in the opinions of some of the tribes respecting the
object of their religious worship. A single family, or a small tribe, banished
into a desert wilderness (such as the whole earth must then have been) would
find employment for all their time in providing the means of subsistence, and
in defending themselves from beasts of prey. In such circumstances they would
have little leisure for meditation: and being constantly conversant with
objects of sense, they would gradually lose the power of meditating upon the
spiritual nature of that Being by whom their ancestors had taught them that all
things were created. The first wanderers would, no doubt, retain in tolerable
purity their original notions of Deity, and they would certainly endeavour to
impress those notions upon their children; but in circumstances infinitely more
favourable to speculation than theirs could have been, the human mind dwells
not long upon notions purely intellectual. We are so accustomed to sensible
objects, and to the ideas of space, extension, and figure, which they are
perpetually impressing upon the imagination, that we find it extremely
difficult to conceive any being without assigning to him a form and a place.
Hence bishop Law supposes that the earliest generations of men (even those to
whom he contends that frequent revelations were vouchsafed) may have been no
better than Anthropomorphites in their conceptions of the Divine Being. Be this
as it may, it is easy to conceive that the members of the first colonies would
quickly lose many of the arts and much of the science which perhaps prevailed
in the parent state; and that, fatigued with the contemplation of intellectual
objects, they would relieve their overstrained faculties by attributing to the
Deity a place of abode, if not a human form. To men totally illiterate, the
place fittest for the habitation of the Deity would undoubtedly appear to be
the sun, the most beautiful and glorious object of which they could form any
idea; an object from which they could not but be sensible that they received
the benefit of light and heat, and which experience must soon have taught them
to be in a great measure the source of vegetation. From looking upon the sun as
the habitation of their God, they would soon proceed to consider it as his
body. Experiencing the effects of power in the sun, they would naturally
conceive that luminary to be animated as their bodies were animated; they would
feel his influence when above the horizon; they would see him moving from east
to west; they would consider him, when set, as gone to take his repose; and
those exertions and intermissions of power being analogues to what they
experienced in themselves, they would look upon the sun as a real animal. Thus
would the Divinity appear to their untutored minds to be a compound being like
a man, partly coporeal and partly spiritual; and as soon as they imbibed such
notions, though perhaps not before, they may be pronounced to have been absolute
idolaters. When men had once got into this train, their gods would multiply
upon them with wonderful rapidity. The moon, the planets, the fixed stars,
&c. would become objects of veneration. Hence we find Moses cautioning the
people of Israel against worshipping the hosts of heaven, Deut. iv. 19. Other
objects, however, from which benefits were received or dangers feared, would
likewise be deified; such as demons, departed heroes, &c. See IDOLATRY.
From these accounts given us by the best writers
of antiquity, it seems that though the polytheists believed heaven, earth, and
hell, were all filled with divinities, yet there was One who was considered as
supreme over all the rest, or, at most, that there were but two self-existent
gods from whom they conceived all the other divinities to have descended in a
manner analogous to human generation. It appears, however, that the vulgar
Pagans considered each divinity as supreme, and unaccountable within his own
province, and therefore entitled to worship, which rested ultimately in
himself. The philosophers, on the other hand, seem to have viewed the inferior
gods as accountable for every part of their conduct to him who was their sire
and sovereign, and to have paid to them only that inferior kind of devotion
which the church of Rome pays to departed saints. The vulgar Pagans were sunk
in the grossest ignorance, from which statesmen, priests, and poets, exerted
their utmost influence to keep them from emerging; for it was a maxim, which,
however absurd, was universally received, "that there were many things
true in religion which it was not convenient for the vulgar to know; and some
things, which, though false, it was expedient that they should believe."
It was no wonder, therefore, that the vulgar should be idolaters and
polytheists. The philosophers, however, were still worse; they were wholly
"without excuse, because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not
as God; neither were thankful, but became vain in their imaginations, and their
foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves wise, they became fools, and
worshiped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is God, blessed
for ever," Rom. i. 20, 21, 22, 25. See list of books under article
IDOLATRY; Prideaux's Con. vol. i. p. 177, 179; Kaims's Sketches of the History
of Man; Bishop Law's Theory of Religion, p. 58, 65 to 68, 94, 296; article
Polytheism in Enc. Brit.; Farmer on the Worship of Human Spirits.
or HIGH PRIEST, a person who has the superintendence and direction of divine worship, as the offering of sacrifices and other religious solemnities. The Roman had a college of pontiffs, and over these a sovereign pontiff, instituted by Numa, whose function it was to prescribe the ceremonies each god was to be worshipped withal, compose the rituals, direct the vestals, and for a good while to perform the business of augury, till, on some superstitious occasion, he was prohibited intermeddling therewith. The Jews, too, had their pontiff; and among the Romanists the pope is styled the sovereign pontiff.
Is used for the state or dignity of a pontiff, or high priest; but more particularly, in modern writers, for the reign of a pope.
A name which comes from the Greek word and
signifies Father. In the East, this appellation is given to all Christian
priests; and in the West, bishops were called by it in ancient times; but now
for many centuries it has been appropriated to the bishop of Rome, whom the
Roman Catholics look upon as the common father of all Christians.
All in communion with the see of Rome unanimously
hold that our Saviour Jesus Christ constituted St. Peter the apostle chief
pastor under himself, to watch over his whole flock here on earth, and to
preserve the unity of it, giving him the power requisite for these ends. They
also believe that out Saviour ordained that St. Peter should have successors,
with the like charge and power to the end of time. Now, as St. Peter resided at
Rome for many years, and suffered martyrdom there, they consider the bishops of
Rome as his successors in the dignity and office of the universal pastor of the
whole Catholic church.
The cardinals have for several ages been the sole
electors of the pope. These are seventy in number, when the sacred college, as
it is called, is complete. Of these, six are cardinal bishops of the six
suburbicarian churches; fifty are cardinal priests, who have all titles from
parish churches in Rome; and fourteen are cardinal deacons, who have their
titles from churches in Rome of less note, called diaconias, or deaconries.
These cardinals are created by the pope when there happen to be vacancies, and
sometimes he names one or two only at a time; but commonly he defers the
promotion until there be ten or twelve vacancies, or more; and then at every
second such promotion, the emperor, the kings of Spain and France, and of
Britain, when Catholic, are allowed to present one each, to be made cardinal,
whom the pope always admits, if there be not some very great objection. These
cardinals are commonly promoted from among such clergyman as have borne offices
in the Roman court; some are assumed from religious orders; eminent
ecclesiastics of other countries are likewise often honoured with this dignity.
Sons of sovereign princes have frequently been members of the sacred college.
Their distinctive dress is scarlet, to signify that they ought to be ready to
shed their blood for the faith and church, when the defence and honour of
either require it. They wear a scarlet cap and hat: the cap is given to them by
the pope if they are at Rome, and is sent to them if they are absent; but the
hat is never given but by the pope's own hand. These cardinals form the pope's
standing council, or consistory, for the management of the public affairs of
church and state. They are divided into different congregations for the more
easy despatch of business; and some of them have the principal offices in the
pontiffical court; as that of cardinal, vicar, penitentiary, chancellor,
chamberlain, prefect of the signature of justice, prefect of memorials, and
secretary of state. They have the title given them of eminence and most eminent.
On the demise of a pope his pontifical seal is
immediately broken by the chamberlain, and all public business is interrupted
that can be delayed; messengers are despatched to all the Catholic sovereigns
to acquaint them of the event, that they may take what measures they think
proper: and that the cardinals, in their dominions, if any there be, may hasten
to the future election, if they choose to attend; whilst the whole attention of
the sacred college is turned to the preservation of tranquillity in the city
and state, and to the necessary preparations for the future election. The
cardinal chamberlain has during the vacancy of the holy see, great authority;
he coins money with his own arms on it, lodges in the pope's apartments, and is
attended by the body guards. He, and the first cardinal bishop, the first
cardinal priest, and the first cardinal deacon, have, during that time, the
government almost entirely in their hands. The body of the deceased pope is
carried to St. Peter's, where funeral service is performed for him with great
pomp for nine days, and the cardinals attend them every morning. In the mean
time, all necessary preparations for the election are made; and the place where
they assemble for that purpose, which is called the Conclave, is fitted up in
that part of the Vatican palace, which is nearest to St. Peter's church, as
this has long been thought the most convenient situation. Here are formed, by
partitions of wood, a number of cells, or chambers, equal to the number of
cardinals, with a small distance between every two, and a broad gallery before
them. A number is put on every cell, and small papers, with corresponding
numbers, are put into a box; every cardinal, or some one for him, draws out one
of these papers, which determines in what cell he is to lodge. The cells are
lined with cloth; and there is a part of each one separated for the
conclavists, or attendants, of whom two are allowed to each cardinal, and three
to cardinal princes. They are persons of some rank, and generally of great
confidence; but they must carry in their master's meals, serve him at table,
and perform all the offices of a menial servant. Two physicians, two surgeons,
and apothecary, and some other necessary officers, are chosen for the conclave
by the cardinals.
On the tenth day after the pope's death, the
cardinals who are then at Rome, and in a competent state of health, meet in the
chapel of St. Peter's, which is called the Gregorian chapel, where a sermon on
the choice of a pope is preached to them, and mass is said for invoking the
grace of the Holy Ghost. Then the cardinals proceed to the conclave in
procession, two by two, and take up their abode. When all is properly settled,
the conclave is shut up, having boxed wheels, or places of communication, in
convenient quarters; there are, also, strong guards placed all around. When any
foreign cardinal arrives after the inclosure, the conclave is opened for his
admission. In the beginning every cardinal signs a paper, containing an
obligation, that, if he shall be raised to the papal chair, he will not
alienate any part of the pontifical dominion; that he will not be prodigal to
his relations; and any other such stipulations as may have been settled in
former times, or framed for that occasion.
We now come to the election itself; and that this
may be effectual, two-thirds of the cardinals present must vote for the same
person. As this is often not easily obtained, they sometimes remain whole
months in the conclave. They meet in the chapel twice every day for giving
their votes; and the election may be effectuated by scrutiny, accession, or
acclamation. Scrutiny is the ordinary method, and consists in this: every
cardinal writes his own name on the inner part of a piece of paper, and this is
folded up and sealed; on the second fold of the same paper, a conclavist writes
the name of the person for whom his master votes. This, according to agreements
observed for some centuries, must be one of the sacred college. On the other
side of the paper is written a sentence at random, which the voter must well
remember. Every cardinal, on entering into the chapel, goes to the altar, and
puts his paper into a large chalice.
When all are convened, two cardinals number the
votes; and if there be more or less than the number of cardinals present, the
voting must be repeated. When this is not the case, the cardinal appointed for
the purpose, reads the outer sentence, and the name of the cardinal under it;
so that each voter, hearing his own sentence, and the name joined with it,
knows that there is no mistake. The names of all the cardinals that are voted
for are taken down in writing, with the number of votes for each; and when it
appears that any one has two-thirds of the number present in his favour, the
election is over; but when this does not happen, the voting papers are all
immediately burnt, without opening up the inner part. When several trials of
coming to a conclusion by this method of scrutiny have been made in vain,
recourse is sometimes had to what is called accession. By it, when a cardinal
perceives that when one or very few votes are wanting to any one for whom he
has not voted at that time, he must say that he accedes to the one who has near
the number of votes requisite; and if his one vote suffices to make up the
two-thirds, or if he is followed by a sufficient number of aceeders, or new
voters, for the said cardinal, the election is accomplished.--Lastly, a pope is
sometimes elected by acclamation; and that is, when a cardinal being pretty
sure that he will be joined by a number sufficient, reads out in the open
chapel, that such a one shall be pope. If he is properly supported, the
election becomes unanimous; those who would, perhaps, oppose it, foreseeing
that their opposition would be fruitless, and rather hurtful to themselves.
When a pope is chosen in any of the three above-mentioned ways, the election is
immediately announced from the balcony in the front of St. Peter's, homage is
paid to the new pontiff, and couriers are sent off with the news to all parts
of Christendom. The pope appoints a day for his coronation at St. Peter's, and
for his taking possession of the patriarchal church of St. John Lateran; all
which is performed with great solemnity. He is addressed by the expression of
holiness, and most holy father.
The Roman Catholics believe that the bishop of
Rome is, under Christ, supreme pastor of the whole church, and as such is not
only the first bishop in order and dignity, but has also a power and
jurisdiction over all Christians, in order to preserve unity and purity of
faith and moral doctrine, and to maintain order and regularity in all churches.
See SUPREMACY. Some Catholic divines are of opinion that the pope cannot err
when he addresses himself to all the faithful on matters of doctrine. They well
know that, as a private doctor, he may fall into mistakes as well as any other
man; but they think that, when he teaches the whole church, Providence must
preserve him from error. We have, however, already examined this sentiment under
the article INFALLIBILITY, to which the reader may refer.
The see of Rome, according to Roman Catholics, is
the centre of catholic unity. All their bishops communicate with the pope, and
by his means with one another, and so form one body. However distant their
churches may be, they all meet at Rome either in person or by their delegates,
or at least by their letters. And, according to the discipline of the latter
ages, though they are presented to the pope for their office from their
respective countries, yet from him they must receive their bulls of
consecration before they can take possession of their sees. See POPERY.
Comprehends the religious doctrines and
practices adopted and maintained by the church of Rome. The following summary,
extracted chiefly from the decrees of the council of Trent, continued under
Paul III. Julius III. and Pius IV. from the year 1545 to 1563, by successive
sessions, and the creed of Pope Pius IV. subjoined to it, and bearing date
November 1564, may not be unacceptable to the reader. One of the fundamental
tenets strenuously maintained by popish writers, is, the infallibility of the
church of Rome; though they are not agreed whether this privilege belongs to the
pope or a general council, or to both united; but they pretend that an
infallible living judge is absolutely necessary to determine controversies, and
to secure peace in the christian church. However, Protestants allege, that the
claim of infallibility in any church is not justified by the authority of
Scripture, much less does it pertain to the church of Rome; and that it is
inconsistent with the nature of religion, and the personal obligations of its
professors; and that it has proved ineffectual to the end for which it is
supposed to be granted, since popes and councils have disagreed in matters of
importance, and they have been incapable, with the advantage of this pretended
infallibility, of maintaining union and peace.
Another essential article of the popish creed is
the supremacy of the pope, or his sovereign power over the universal church.
See SUPREMACY.
Farther; the doctrine of the seven sacraments is
a peculiar and distinguishing doctrine of the church of Rome; these are
baptism, confirmation, the eucharist, penance, extreme unction, orders, and
matrimony.
The council of Trent (sess. 7. can. 1.)
pronounces an anathema on those who say that the sacraments are more or fewer
than seven, or that any one of the above number is not truly and properly a
sacrament. And yet it does not appear that they amounted to this number before
the twelfth century, when Hugo de St. Victore and Peter Lombard, about the year
1144, taught that there were seven sacraments. The council of Florence, held in
1438, was the first council that determined this number. These sacraments
confer grace, according to the decree of the council of Trent, (sess.7. can.8.)
ex opere operato, by the mere administration of them: three of them, viz.
baptism, confirmation, and orders, are said (c. 9.) to impress an indelible
character, so that they cannot be repeated without sacrilege; and the efficacy
of every sacrament depends on the intention of the priest by whom it is
administered. (can. 11.) Pope Pius expressly enjoins that all these sacraments
should be administered according to the received and approved rites of the
Catholic church. With regard to the eucharist, in particular, we may here
observe, that the church of Rome holds the doctrine of trasubstantiation; the
necessity of paying divine worship to Christ under the form of the consecrated
bread or host; the propitiatory sacrifice of the mass, according to their ideas
of which, Christ is truly and properly offered as a sacrifice as often as the
priest says mass; it practises, likewise, solitary mass, in which the priest
alone, who consecrates, communicates, and allows communion only in one kind,
viz. the bread of the laity. Sess. 14.
The doctrine of merits is another distinguishing
tenet of popery; with regard to which the council of Trent has expressly
decreed (sess. 6. can. 32.) that the good works of justified persons are truly
meritorious; deserving not only an increase of grace, but eternal life and and
increase of glory; and it has anathematized all who deny this doctrine. Of the
same kind is the doctrine of satisfactions; which supposes that penitents may
truly satisfy, by the afflictions they endure under the dispensations of
Providence, or by voluntary penances to which they submit, for the temporal
penalties of sin to which they are subject, even after the remission of their
eternal punishment. Sess. 6, can. 30. and sess. 14. can. 3 and 9. In this
connection we may mention the popish distinction of venial and mortal sins: the
greatest evils arising from the former, are the temporary pains of purgatory;
but no man, it is said, can obtain the pardon of the latter, without confessing
to a priest, and performing the penances which he imposes.
The council of Trent (sess 14. can.1.) has
expressly decreed, that every one is accursed who shall affirm that penance is
not truly and properly a sacrament instituted by Christ in the universal
church, for reconciling those Christians tot he Divine Majesty, who have fallen
into sin after baptism; and this sacrament, it is declared, consists of two
parts, the matter and the form: the matter is the act of the penitent,
including contrition, confession, and satisfaction; the form of it is the act
of absolution on the part of the priest. Accordingly it is enjoined, that it is
the duty of every man who hath fallen after baptism, to confess his sins once a
year, at least, to a priest; that this confession is to be secret; for public
confession is neither commanded nor expedient: and that it must be exact and
particular, including every kind and act of sin, with all the circumstances
attending it. When the penitent has so done, the priest pronounces an
absolution, which is not conditional or declarative only, but absolute and
judicial. this secret or auricular confession was first decreed and established
in the fourth council of Lateran, under Innocent III. in 1215. (cap. 21.) And
the decree of this council was afterwards confirmed and enlarged in the council
of Florence and in that of Trent, which ordains, that confession was instituted
by Christ; that by the law of God it is necessary to salvation, and that it has
always been practised in the Christian church. As for the penances imposed on
the penitent by way of satisfaction, they have been commonly the repetition of
certain forms of devotion, as paternosters, or ave marias, the payment of
stipulated sums, pilgrimages, fasts, or various species of corporal discipline.
But the most formidable penance, in the estimation of many who have belonged to
the Roman communion, has been the temporary pains of purgatory. But under all
the penalties which are inflicted or threatened in the Romish church, it has
provided relief by its indulgences, and by its prayers or masses for the dead,
performed professedly for relieving and rescuing the souls that are detained in
purgatory.
Another article that has been long
authoriatatively enjoined and observed in the church of Rome is the celibacy of
her clergy. This was first enjoined at Rome by Gregory VII. about the year
1074, and established in England by Anselm, archbishop of Canterbury, about the
year 1175; though his predecessor Lanfranc had imposed it upon the prebendaries
and clergy that lived in towns. And though the council of Trent was repeatedly
petitioned by several princes and states to abolish this restraint, the
obligation of celibacy was rather established than relaxed by this council; for
they decreed, that marriage contracted after a vow of continence, is neither
lawful nor valid; and thus deprived the church of the possibility of ever
restoring marriage to the clergy. For if marriage, after a vow, be in itself
unlawful, the greatest authority upon earth cannot dispense with it, nor permit
marriage to the clergy who have already vowed continence. See CELIBACY.
To the doctrines and practices above recited, may
be farther added, the worship of images, of which Protestants accuse the
Papists. But to this accusation the Papist replies, that he keeps images by him
to preserve in his mind the memory of the persons represented by them; as
people are wont to preserve the memory of their deceased friends by keeping
their pictures. He is taught (he says) to use them so as to cast his eyes upon
the pictures or images, and thence to raise his heart to the things
represented; and there to employ it in meditation, love, and thanksgiving,
desire of imitation, &c. as the object requires.
These pictures or images have this advantage,
that they inform the mind by one glance of what in reading might require a
whole chapter: there being no other difference between them than that reading
represents leisurely, and by degrees, and a picture all at once. Hence he finds
a convenience in saying his prayers with some devout pictures before him, he
being no sooner distracted, but the sight of these recalls his wandering
thoughts to the right object; and as certainly brings something good into his
mind, as an immodest picture disturbs his heart with filthy thoughts. And
because he is sensible that these holy pictures and images represent and bring
to his mind such objects as in his heart he loves, honours, and venerates, he
cannot but upon that account love, honour, and respect the images themselves.
The council of Trent likewise decreed, that all
bishops and pastors who have the care of souls, do diligently instruct their
flocks that it is good and profitable to desire the intercession of saints
reigning with Christ in heaven. And this decree the Papists endeavour to defend
by the following observations: they confess that we have but one mediator of redemption:
but affirm that it is acceptable to God that we should have many mediators of
intercession. Moses (say they) was such a mediator for the Israelites; Job for
his three friends; Stephen for his persecutors. The Romans were thus desired by
St. Paul to be his mediators; so were the Corinthians; so the Ephesians (Ep.
ad. Rom. Cor. Eph.) so almost every sick man desires the congregation to be his
mediators, by remembering him in their prayers. And so the Papist desires the
blessed in heaven to be his mediators: that is, that they would pray to God for
him. But between these living and dead mediators there is no similarity: the
living mediator is present, and certainly hears the request of those who desire
him to intercede for them; the dead mediator is as certainly absent, and cannot
possibly hear the requests of all those who at the same instant may be begging
him to intercede for them, unless he be possessed of the divine attribute of
omnipresence; and he who gives that attribute to any creature, is unquestionably
guilty of idolatry. And as this decree is contrary to one of the first
principles of natural religion, so does it receive no countenance from
Scripture, or any Christian writer of the three first centuries. Other
practices peculiar to the Papists are, the religious honour and respect that
they pay to sacred relics: by which they understand not only the bodies and
parts of the bodies of the saints, but any of those things that appertained to
them, and which they touched; and the celebration of divine service in an
unknown tongue: to which purpose the council of Trent hath denounced an
anathema on any one who shall say that mass ought to be celebrated only in the
vulgar tongue. (Sess. 25. and sess. 22, can. 9.) Though the council of Lateran,
under Innocent III. in 1215 (can. 9.) had expressly decreed, that, because, in
many parts within the same city and diocese, there are many people of different
manners and rites mixed together, but of one faith, the bishops of such cities
of dioceses should provide fit men for celebrating divine offices, according to
the diversity of tongues and rites, and for administering the sacraments.
We shall only add, that the church of Rome
maintains, that unwritten traditions ought to be added to the Holy Scriptures,
in order to supply their defect, and to be regarded as of equal authority; that
the books of the Apocrypha are canonical Scripture; that the Vulgate edition of
the Bible is to be deemed authentic; and that the Scriptures are to be received
and interpreted according to that sense which the holy mother church, to whom
it belongs to judge of the true sense, hath held, and doth hold, and according
to the unanimous consent of the fathers.
Such are the principal and distinguishing
doctrines of popery, most of which have received the sanction of the council of
Trent, and that of the creed of pope Pius IV. which is received, professed, and
sworn to, by every one who enters into holy orders in the church of Rome; and
at the close of this creed, we are told, that the faith contained in it is so
absolutely and indispensably necessary, that no man can be saved without it.
See ANTICHRIST; Bowers's History of the Popes; Smith's Errors of the Church of
Rome detected; Bennet's Confutation of Popery; Sermons at Salter's Hall against
Popery; Bishop Burtnet's Travels, &c.; Moore's View of Society and Manners
in Italy; Dr. Middleton's Letters from Rome; Stevenson's Historical and
Critical View of some of the Doctrines of the Church of Rome.
See INSTITUTIONS.
See DAEMONIACS.
Is that state or situation, opposed to riches, in which we are deprived of the conveniences of life. Indigence is a degree lower, where we want the necessaries, and is opposed to superfluity. Want seems rather to arise by accident, implies a scarcity of provision rather than a lack of money, and is opposed to abundance. Need and necessity relate less to the situation of life than the other three words, but more to the relief we expect, or the remedy we seek; with this difference between the two, that need seems less pressng than necessity.--2. Poverty of mind is a state of ignorance, or a mind void of religious principle, Rev. iii. 17.--3. Poverty of spirit, consists in an inward sense and feeling of our wants and defects; a conviction of our wretched and forlorn condition by nature; with a dependence on divine grace and mercy for pardon and acceptance, Mat. v. 3. It must be distinguished from a poor spiritedness, a sneaking fearfulness, which bringeth a snare. It is the effect of the operation of the Divine Spirit on the heart, John xvi. 8.; is attended with submission to the divine will; contentment in our situation; meekness and forbearance as to others, and genuine humility as to ourselves. It is a spirit approved of by God, Isa. lxvi. 2. evidential of true religion, Luke, xvii. 13. and terminates in endless felicity, Matt. v. 3. Isa. lvii. 15. Ps. xxxiv. 18. Dunlop's Ser. lec. 1. vol. ii. Barclay's Dict.; South's Ser. vol. x. ser. 1; No. 464, Spec. vol. vi.; Robert Harris's Sermons. ser. 3. part 3.
Ability, force, strength. Power includes a particular relation to the subordinate execution of superior orders. In the word authority we find a sufficient energy to make us perceive a right. Dominion carries with it an idea of empire.
See OMNIPOTENCE.
Are those faculties by which we think, reason, judge, &c. "They are so various," says Dr. Reid, "so many, so connected, and complicated in most of their operations, that there never has been any division of them proposed which is not liable to considerable objections. The most common division is that of understand and will. Under the will we comprehend out active powers, and all that lead to action, or influence the mind to act; such as appetites, passions, affections. The understanding comprehends our contemplative powers, by which we perceive objects; by which we conceive or remember them; by which we analyze or compound them; and by which we judge and reason concerning them. Or the intellectual powers are commonly divided into simple apprehension, judgment, and reasoning." See Reid on the Active Powers, also on the Human Mind, and the Intellectual Powers; Locke on the Understanding. For the influence Christianity has had on the moral and intellectual powers, see White's admirable Sermons, ser. 9.
An acknowledgment made of the excellency or perfection of any person or action, with a commendation of the same. "The desire of praise," says an elegant writer, "is generally connected with all the finer sensibilities of human nature. It affords a ground on which exhortation, counsel, and reproof, can work a proper effect. To be entirely destitute of this passion betokens an ignoble mind, on which no moral impression is easily made; for where there is no desire of praise, there will also be no sense of reproach; but while it is admitted to be a natural and in many respects an useful principle of action, we are to observe that it is entitled to no more than our secondary regard. It has its boundary set, by transgressing which, it is at once transformed from an innocent into a most dangerous passion. When passing its natural line, it becomes the ruling spring of conduct; when the regard which we pay to the opinions of men encroaches on that reverence which we owe to the voice of conscience and the sense of duty; the love of praise, having then gone out of its proper place, instead of improving, corrupts; and instead of elevating, debases our nature." Young's Love of Fame; Blair's Sermons, ser. 6. vol. ii.; Jortin's Dis. dis. 4. passim; Wilberforce's Pract. View, ch. iv. sec. 3; Smith's Theory of Mor. Sent. vol. 1. p. 233; Fitzosborne's Letters, let. 18.
The acknowledging his perfections, works, and benefits. Praise and thanksgiving are generally considered as synonymous, yet some distinguish them thus. Praise properly terminates in God, on account of his natural excellencies and perfections, and is that act of devotion by which we confess and admire his several attributes: but thanksgiving is a more contracted duty, and imports only a grateful sense and acknowledgment of past mercies. We praise God for all his glorious acts of every kind, that regard either us or other men; for his very vengeance, and those judgments which he sometimes sends abroad in the earth; but we thank him, properly speaking, for the instances of his goodness alone, and for such only of these as we ourselves are some way concerned in. See THANKSGIVING; Bishop Atterbury's Sermon on Psalm l.14; Saurin's Sermons, vol. i. ser. 14; Tillotson's Sermons, ser. 146. concl.
A request or petition for mercies; or it is
"an offering up our desires to God, for things agreeable to his will, in
the name of Christ, by the help of his Spirit, with confession of our sins, and
thankful acknowledgment of his mercies." Nothing can be more rational or
consistent than the exercise of this duty. It is a divine injunction that men
should always pray, and not faint, Luke, xviii. 1. It is highly proper we
should acknowledge the obligations we are under to the Divine Being, and
supplicate his throne for the blessings we stand in need of. It is essential to
our peace and felicity, and is the happy mean of our carrying on and enjoying
fellowship with God. It has an influence on our tempers and conduct, and
evidences our subjection and obedience to God. We shall here consider the
object, nature, kinds, matter, manner, and forms of prayer, together with its
efficacy, and the objections made against it.
I. The object of prayer is God alone, through
Jesus Christ, as the Mediator. All supplications, therefore, to saints or
angels, are not only useless but blasphemous. All worship of the creature,
however exalted that creature is, is idolatry, and strictly prohibited in the
sacred law of God. Nor are we to pray to the Trinity, as three distinct Gods;
for though the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost be addressed in various parts of the
Scripture, 2 Cor. xiii. 14. 2 Thess. ii. 16, 17., yet never as three Gods, for
that would lead us directly to the doctrine of polytheism: the more ordinary mode
the Scripture points out, is, to address the Father through the Son, depending
on the Spirit to help our infirmities, Eph. ii. 18. Rom. viii. 26.
II. As to the nature of this duty: it must be
observed, that it does not consist in the elevation of the voice, the posture
of the body, the use of a form, or the mere extemporary use of words, nor,
properly speaking, in any thing of an exterior nature; but simply the offering
up of our desires to God, Matt. xv. 8. (See the definition above.) It has been generally
divided into adoration, by which we express our sense of the goodness and
greatness of God, Dan. iv. 34, 35; confession, by which we acknowledge our
unworthiness, 1 John, i. 9; supplication, by which we pray for pardon, grace,
or any blessing we want, Matt. vii. 7; intercession, by which we pray for
others, James, v. 16; and thanksgiving, by which we express our gratitude to
God, Phil. iv. 6. To which some add invocation, a making mention of one or more
of the names of God; pleading, arguing our case with God in an humble and
fervent manner; dedication, or surrendering ourselves to God; deprecation, by
which we desire that evils may be averted; blessing, in which we express our
joy in God, and gratitude for his mercies: but, as all these appear to me to be
included in the first five parts of prayer, I think they need not be insisted
on.
III. The different kinds of prayer, are, 1.
Ejaculatory, by which the mind is directed to God on any emergency. It is
derived from the word ejaculor, or dart or shoot out suddenly, and is therefore
appropriate to describe this kind of prayer, which is made up of short
sentences spontaneously springing from the mind. The Scriptures afford us many
instances of ejaculatory prayer, Exod. xiv. 15. 1 Sam. i. 13. Rom. vii. 24, 25.
Gen. xliii. 29. Judges, xvi. 28. Luke, xxiii. 42, 43. It is one of the
principal excellencies of this kind of prayer, that it can be practised at all
times, and in all places; in the public ordinances of religion; in all our
ordinary and extraordinary undertakings; in times of affliction, temptation,
and danger; in seasons of social intercourse, in worldly business, in
travelling, in sickness, and pain. In fact, every thing around us, and every
event that transpires, may afford us matter for ejaculation. It is worthy,
therefore, of our practice, especially when we consider that it is a species of
devotion that can receive no impediment from any external circumstances; that
it has a tendency to support the mind, and keep it in a happy frame; fortifies
us against the temptations of the world; elevates our affections to God;
directs the minds into a spiritual channel; and has a tendency to excite trust
and dependence on Divine Providence.--2. Secret or closet prayer is another
kind of prayer to which we should attend. It has its name from the manner in
which Christ recommended it, Matt. vi. 6. He himself set us an example of it,
Luke, vi. 12; and it has been the practice of the saints in every age, Gen.
xxviii. xxxii. Dan. vi. 10. Acts, x. 9. There are some particular occasions
when this duty may be practised to advantage, as when we are entering into any
important situation; undertaking any thing of consequence; before we go into
the world; when calamities surround us, Isa. xxvi. 20; or when ease and prosperity
attend us. As closet prayer is calculated to inspire us with peace, defend us
from our spiritual enemies, excite us to obedience, and promote our real
happiness, we should be watchful lest the stupidity of our frame, the intrusion
of company, the cares of the world, the insinuations of Satan, or the
indulgence of sensual objects, prevent us from the constant exercise of this
necessary and important duty.--3. Family prayer is also another part not to be
neglected. It is true there is no absolute command for this in God's word; yet
from hints, allusions, and examples, we may learn that it was the practice of
our forefathers: Abraham, Gen. xviii. 19. David, 2 Sam. vi. 20. Solomon, Prov.
xxii. 6. Job i. 4,5. Joshua, xxiv. 15. See also Eph. vi. 4. Prov. vi. 20. Jer.
x. 25. Acts, x. 2, 30. Acts, xvi. 15. Family prayer, indeed, may not be
essential to the character of a true Christian, but it is surely no honour to
heads of families to have it said that they have no religion in their houses.
If we consider what a blessing it is likely to prove to our children and our
domestics; what comfort it must afford to ourselves; what utility it may prove
to the community at large; how it sanctifies domestic comforts and crosses; and
what a tendency it has to promote order, decency, sobriety, and religion in
general, we must at once see the propriety of attending to it. The objection
often made to family prayer is, want of time; but this is a very frivolous
excuse, since the time allotted for this purpose need be but short, and may
easily be redeemed from sleep or business. Others say, they have no gifts:
where this is the case, a form may soon be procured and used, but it should be
remembered that gifts increase by exercise, and no man can properly decide,
unless he make repeated trials. Others are deterred through shame, or the fear
of man; in answer to such we shall refer them to the declarations of our Lord,
Matt. x. 37, 38. Mark, viii. 38. As to the season for family prayer, every
family must determine for itself; but before breakfast every morning, and
before supper at night, seems most proper: perhaps a quarter of an hour or
twenty minutes may be sufficient as to the time.--4. Social prayer is another
kind Christians are called upon to attend to. It is denominated social, because
it is offered by a society of Christians in their collective capacity, convened
for that particular purpose, either on some peculiar and extraordinary
occasions, or at stated and regular seasons. Special prayer-meetings are such
as are held at the meeting and parting of intimate friends, especially churches
and ministers; when the church is in a state of unusual deadness and
barrenness; when ministers are sick, or taken away by death; in times of public
calamity and distress, &c. Stated meetings for social prayer are such as
are held weekly in some places which have a special regard to the state of the
nation and churches: missionary prayer-meetings for the spread of the Gospel:
weekly meetings held in most of the congregations which have a more particular
reference to their own churches, ministers, the sick, feeble, and weak of the
flock. Christians are greatly encouraged to this kind of prayer from the
consideration of the promise, Matt. xviii. 20; the benefit of mutual
supplications; from the example of the most eminent primitive saints, Mal. iii.
16. Acts, xii. 12; the answers given to prayer, Acts, xii. 1-12. Josh. x.
Isaiah, xxxvii. &c. and the signal blessing they are to the churches, Phil.
i. 19. 2 Cor. i. 11. These meetings should be attended with regularity; those
who engage should study simplicity, brevity, Scripture language, seriousness of
spirit, and every thing that has a tendency to edification. We now come,
lastly, to take notice of public prayer, or that in which the whole congregation
is engaged, either in repeating a set form, or acquiescing with the prayer of
the minister who leads their devotions. This is both an ancient and important
part of religious exercise; it was a part of the patriarchical worship, Gen.
iv. 56; it was also carried on by the Jews, Exod. xxix. 43. Luke, i. 10. It was
a part of the temple service, Is. lvi. 7. 1 Kings, viii. 59. Jesus Christ
recommended it both by his example and instruction, Matt. xviii. 20. Luke, iv.
16. The disciples also attended to it, Acts, ii. 41, 42; and the Scriptures in
many places countenance it, Exod. xx. 24, Psal. lxiii. 1, 2. Psal. lxxxiv. 11.
Psal. xxvii. 4. For the nature, necessity, place, time, and attendance on
public worship, see WORSHIP.
IV. Of the matter of prayer. "It is
necessary," says Dr. Watts, "to furnish ourselves with proper matter,
that we may be able to hold much converse with God; to entertain ourselves and
others agreeably and devoutly in worship; to assist the exercise o our own
grace and others, by a rich supply of divine thought and desires in prayer,
that we may not be forced to make too long and indecent pauses whilst we are
performing that duty; nor break off abruptly as soon as we have begun for want
of matter; nor pour out abundance of words to dress up narrow and scanty sense
for want of variety of devout thoughts. 1. We should labour after a large
acquaintance with all things that belong to religion; for there is nothing that
relates to religion but may properly make some part of the matter of our
prayer. A great acquaintance with God in his nature, perfections, works and
word; an intimate acquaintance with ourselves, and a lively sense of our own
frames, wants, sorrows, and joys, will supply us with abundant furniture. We
should also be watchful observers of the dealings of God with us in every
ordinance, and in every providence. We should observe the working of our heart
towards God, or towards the creature, and often examine our temper and our
life, both in our natural, our civil, and religious actions. For this purpose,
as well as upon many other accounts, it will be of great advantage to keep by
us in writing some of the most remarkable providences of God, and instances of
his mercy or anger towards us, and some of our most remarkable carriages
towards him, whether sins, or duties, or the exercises of grace.--2. We should
not content ourselves merely with generals; but if we wish to be furnished with
larger supplies of matter, we must descend to particulars in our confessions,
petitions, and thanksgivings. We should enter into a particular consideration
of the attributes, the glories, the graces, and the relations of God. We should
express our sins, our wants, and our sorrows, with a particular sense of the
mournful circumstances that attend them: it will enlarge our hearts with prayer
and humiliation if we confess the aggravations that increase the guilt of our
sins, viz. whether they have been committed against knowledge, against the
warnings of conscience, &c. It will furnish us with large matter, if we run
over the exalting and heightening circumstances of our mercies and comforts,
viz. that they are great, and spiritual, and eternal, as well as temporal. Our
petitions and thanksgivings, in a special manner, should be suited to the place
and circumstances of ourselves, and those that we pray with, and those that we
pray for.--3. It is very proper, at solemn seasons of worship, to read some
part of the word of God, or some spiritual treatise written by holy men; or to
converse with fellow Christians about divine things, or to spend some time in
recollection or meditation of things that belong to religion: this will not
only supply us with divine matter, but will compose our thoughts to a
solemnity. Just before we engage in that work, we should be absent a little
from the world, that our spirits may be freer for converse with God.--4. If we
find our hearts, after all very barren, and hardly know how to frame a prayer
before God of ourselves, it has been oftentimes useful to take a book in our hand,
wherein are contained some spiritual meditations in a petitionary form, some
devout reflections, or excellent patterns of prayer; and, above all, the Psalms
of David, some of the prophecies of Isaiah, some chapters in the Gospels, or
any of the Epistles. Thus we may lift up our hearts to God in secret, according
as the verses or paragraphs we read are suited to the case of our own souls.
This many Christians have experienced as a very agreeable help, and of great
advantage in their secret retirement.--5. We must not think it absolutely
necessary to insist upon all the parts of prayer in every address to God;
though in our stated and solemn prayers there are but few of them that can be
well left out. What we omit at one time we may, perhaps, pursue at another with
more lively affection. But let us be sure to insist most upon those things
which are warmest in our hearts, especially in secret. We should let those
parts of prayer have the largest share in the performance for which our spirits
is best prepared, whether it be adoration, petition, confession, or
thanksgiving.--6. We should suit the matter of our prayers to the special
occasion of each particular duty, to the circumstances of the time, place, and
persons with and for whom we pray. This will direct us to the choice of proper
thoughts and language for every part of prayer.--7. We should not affect to
pray long for the sake of length, or to stretch out our matter by labour and
toil of thought, beyond the furniture of our own spirit. Sometimes a person is
betrayed by an affectation of long prayers into crude, rash, and unseemly
expressions; we are tempted hereby to tautologies, to say the same thing over
and over again. We are in danger of tiring those that join with us. We exceed
the season that is allotted for us in prayer, especially when others are to
succeed in the same work."
V. Of the method of prayer. "Method,"
continues Dr. Watts, "is necessary to guide our thoughts, to regulate our
expressions, and dispose of the several parts of prayer in such an order, as is
most easy to by understood by those that join with us, and most proper to
excite and maintain our own devotion and theirs. This will be of use to secure
us from confusion, prevent repetitions, and guard us against roving
digressions. The general rules of method in prayer are these three: 1. Let the
general and the particular heads in prayer be well distinguished, and usually
let generals be mentioned first, and particulars follow.--2. Let things of the
same kind, for the most part, be put together in prayer. We should not run from
one part to another by starts, and sudden wild thoughts, and then return often
to the same part again, going backward and forward in confusion: this bewilders
the mind of him that prays, disgusts our fellow-worshippers, and injures their
devotion.--3. Let those things, in every part of prayer, which are the proper
objects of our judgment, be first mentioned, and then those that influence and
move our affections; not that we should follow such a manner of prayer as is
more like preaching, as some imprudently have done, speaking many divine truths
without the form or air of prayer. Yet it must be granted that there is no
necessity of always confining ourselves to this, or to any other set method, no
more than there is of confining ourselves to a form in prayer. Sometimes the
mind is so divinely full of one particular part of prayer, that high
expressions of gratitude, and of devoting ourselves to God, break out first. I
am persuaded, however, that if young Christians did not give themselves up to a
loose and negligent habit of speaking every thing that comes uppermost, but
attempted to learn this holy skill by a recollection of the several parts of
prayer, and properly disposing their thoughts, there would be great numbers in
our churches that would arrive at a good degree of the gift of prayer, and that
to the great edification of our churches, as well as of their own
families."
As to expression in prayer, it may be observed,
that though prayer be the proper work of the heart, yet in this present state,
in secret as well as in social prayer, the language of the lips is an excellent
aid in this part of worship. Expressions are useful not only to dress our
thoughts, but sometimes to form, and shape, and perfect the ideas and
affections of our minds. They serve to awaken the holy passions of the soul as
well as to express them. They fix and engage all our powers in religion and
worship; and they serve to regulate as well as to increase our devotion. The
directions to attain a treasure of expressions are these: 1. We should labour
after a fresh, particular, and lively sense of the greatness and grace of God,
and of our own wants, and sins, and mercies. The passions of the mind, when
they are moved, do mightily help the tongue; they give a natural eloquence to
those who know not any rules of art, and they almost constrain the dumb to
speak. There is a remarkable instance of this in ancient history. When Atys,
the son of Croesus the king, who was dumb from his childhood, saw his father
ready to be slain, the violence of his passion broke the bonds wherewith his
tongue was tied, and he cried out to save him. Let our spiritual senses be
always awake and lively, then words will follow in a greater or less
degree.--2. We should treasure up such expressions, especially, as we read in
Scripture, and such as we have found in other books of devotion, or such as we
have heard fellow Christians make use of, whereby our own hearts have been
sensibly moved and warmed.--3. We should be always ready to engage in holy
conference, and divine discourse. This will teach us to speak of the things of
God. It should be our practice to recollect and talk over with one another the
sermons we have heard, the books of divinity we have been conversant with,
those parts of the word of God we have lately read, and especially our own
experiences of divine things. Hereby we shall gain a large treasure of language
to clothe our thoughts and affections.--4. We should pray for the gift of
utterance, and seek the blessing of the Spirit of God upon the use of proper
means to obtain a treasure of expressions for prayer; for the wise man tells
us, that "the preparation of the heart in man, and the answer of the
tongue, is from the Lord," Prov. xvi. 1. The rules about the choice and
use of proper expressions are these: 1. We should choose those expressions that
best suit our meaning, that most exactly answer the ideas of our mind, and that
are fitted to our sense and apprehension of things.--2. We should use such a way
of speaking as may be most natural and easy to be understood, and most
agreeable to those that join with us. We should avoid all foreign and uncommon
words; all those expressions which are too philosophical, and those which
savour too much of mystical divinity; all dark metaphors, or expressions that
are used only by some particular violent partymen. We should likewise avoid
length and obscurity in our sentences, and in the placing of our words; and not
interline our expressions with too many parentheses, which cloud and entangle
the sense.--3. Our language should be grave and decent, which is a medium
between magnificence and meanness; we should avoid all glittering language and
affected style. An excessive fondness of elegance and finery of style in prayer
discovers the same pride and vanity of mind, as an affection to many jewels and
fine apparel in the house of God: it betrays us into a neglect of our hearts,
and of experimental religion, by an affection to make the nicest speech, and
say the finest things we can, instead of sincere devotion, and praying in the
spirit. On the other hand, we should avoid mean and coarse, and too familiar
expressions; such as excite any contemptible or ridiculous ideas; such as raise
any improper or irreverent thoughts in the mind, or base and impure images, for
these much injure the devotion of our fellow-worshippers.--4. We should seek
after those ways of expression that are pathetical; such as denote the fervency
of affection, and carry life and spirit with them; such as may awaken and
exercise our love, our hope, our holy joy, our sorrow, our fear, and our faith,
as well as express the activity of those graces. This is the way to raise,
assist, and maintain devotion. We should, therefore, avoid such a sort of style
as looks more like preaching, which some persons that affect long prayers have
been guilty of to a great degree: they have been speaking to the people rather
than speaking to God; they have wandered away from god to speak to men; but
this is quite contrary to the nature of prayer, for prayer is our own address
to God, and pouring out our hearts before him with warm and proper
affections.--5. We should not always confine ourselves to one set form of words
to express any particular request; nor take too much pains to avoid an
expression merely because we used it in prayer heretofore. We need not be over
fond of a nice uniformity of words, nor of perpetual diversity of expression in
every prayer: it is best to keep the middle between these two extremes. The
imitation of those Christians and ministers that have the best gifts, will be
an excellent direction in this as well as in the former cases.
As to the voice in prayer: in the first place,
our words should be all pronounced distinct, and ought not to be made shorter
by cutting off the last syllable, nor longer by the addition of hems and o's,
of long breaths, affected groanings, and useless sounds, &c. --2. Every
sentence should be spoken loud enough to be heard, yet none so loud as to
affright or offend the ear. Some persons have got a habit of beginning their
prayers, and even upon the most common family occasions, so loud as to startle
the company; others begin so low in a large assembly, that it looks like secret
worship, and as though they forbid those that are present to join with them.
Both these extremes are to be avoided by prudence and moderation.--3. we should
observe a due medium between excessive swiftness and slowness of speech, for
both are faulty in their kind. If we are too swift, our words will be hurried
on, and be mingled in confusion; if we are too slow, this will be tiresome to
the hearers, and will make the worship appear heavy and dull.
As to gesture in prayer: all indecencies should
be avoided. Prostration may be sometimes used in secret prayer, under a deep
and uncommon sense of sin; but kneeling is the most frequent posture; and
nature seems to dictate and lead us to it as an expression of humility, of a
sense of our wants, a supplication for mercy, and adoration of and dependence on
him before whom we kneel.
"Standing is a posture not unfit for this
worship, especially in places where we have not conveniency for the humbler
gestures: but sitting, or other postures of rest and laziness, ought not to be
indulged, unless persons are aged or infirm, or the work of prayer be drawn out
so long as to make it troublesome to human nature to maintain itself always in
one posture. The head should be kept for the most part without motion; the
whole visage should be composed to gravity and solemnity. The eye should be
kept from roving, and some think it best to keep the eyes closed. The lifting
up of the hands is a very natural expression of our seeking help from God. As
to other parts of the body there is little need of direction. In secret
devotion, sighs and groans may be allowed; but in public these things should be
less indulged. If we use ourselves to various motions, or noise made by the
hands or feet, or any other parts, it will tempt others to think that our minds
are not very intensely engaged; or, at least, it will appear so familiar and
irreverent, as we would not willingly be guilty of in the presence of our
superiors here on earth."
VI. As to forms of prayer. We find this has been
a matter of controversy among divines and Christians, whether such ought to be
used, or whether extempore prayers are not to be preferred. We shall state the
arguments on both sides. Those who are advocates for forms, observe, that it
prevents absurd, extravagant, or impious addresses to God, as well as the
confusion of extemporary prayer; that forms were used under the Old Testament
dispensation; and, in proof thereof cite Numb. vi. 24, 26. Numb. x. 35, 36. On
the other side it is answered, that it is neither reasonable nor Scriptural to
look for the pattern of Christian worship in the Mosaic dispensation, which,
with all its rites and ceremonies, is abrogated and done away; that, though
forms may be of use to children, and such as are very ignorant, yet restriction
to forms, either in public or private does not seem Scriptural or lawful. If we
look to the authority and example of Christ and his apostles, every thing is in
favour of extempore prayer. The Lord's prayer, it is observed, was not given to
be a set form, exclusive of extemporary prayer. See LORD'S PRAYER. It is
farther argued, that a form cramps the desires; inverts the true order of
prayer, making our words to regulate our desires, instead of our desires
regulating our words; has a tendency to make us formal; cannot be suited to
every one's case; that it looks as if we were not in reality convinced of our
wants, when we want a form to expess them; and, finally, in answer to the two
first arguments, that it is seldom the case that those who are truly sensible
of their condition, and pray extempore, do it in an impious and extravagant
manner; and if any who have the gift of prayer really do so, and run into the
extreme of enthusiasm, yet this is not the case with the generality, since an
unprejudiced attention to those who pray extempore must convince us, that, if
their prayers be not so elegantly composed as that of a set form, they are more
appropriate, and delivered with more energy and feeling.
VII. The efficacy of prayer. It has been
objected, that, "if what we request be fit for us, we shall have it
without praying; if it be not fit for us, we cannot obtain it by praying."
But it is answered, that it may be agreeable to perfect wisdom to grant that to
our prayers which it would not have been agreeable to the same wisdom to have
given us without praying for. But what virtue, you will ask, is there in
prayer, which should make a favour consistent with wisdom, which would not have
been so without it? To this question, which contains the whole difficulty
attending the subject, the following possibilities are offered in reply: 1. A
favour granted to prayer, may be more apt on that very account to produce a
good effect upon the person obliged. It may hold in the divine bounty, what
experience has raised into a proverb in the collation of human benefits, that
what is obtained without asking, is oftentimes received without gratitude.--2.
It may be consistent with the wisdom of the Deity to withhold his favours till
they be asked for, as an expedient to encourage devotion in his rational creation,
in order thereby to keep up and circulate a knowledge and sense of their
dependency on him.--3. Prayer has a natural tendency to amend the petitioner
himself; it composes the mind, humbles us under a conviction of what we are,
and under the gracious influence of the Divine Spirit assimilates us into the
divine image. Let it suffice, therefore, to say, that, though we are certain
that God cannot be operated on, or moved as a fellow-creature may; that though
we cannot inform him of any thing he does not know, nor add any thing to his
essential and glorious perfections, by any services of ours; yet we should
remember that he has appointed this as a mean to accomplish an end; that he has
commanded us to engage in this important duty, 1 Thess. v. 17; that he has
promised his Spirit to assist us in it, Rom. viii. 26; that the Bible abounds
with numerous answers to prayer; and that the promise still relates to all who
pray, that answers shall be given, Matt. vii. 7. Psal. l. 15. Luke xviii. 1
&c. Phil. iv. 6,7. James v. 16. Wilkins, Henry, Watts, on Prayer;
Townsend's Nine Sermons on Prayer; Paley's Mor. Phil. vol. ii. p. 31; Mason's
Student and Pastor, p. 87; Wollaston's Rel. of Nat. p.122, 124; H. Moore on
Education, ch. 1. vol. ii.; Barrow's Works, vol. i. ser. 6; Smith's System of
Prayer; Scamp's Sermon on Family Religion.
One who discourses publicly on religious subjects. See articles DECLAMATION, ELOQUENCE, MINISTER, and SERMON.
Is the discoursing publicly on any religious
subject. It is impossible, in the compass of this work, to give a complete
history of this article from the beginning down to the present day. This must
be considered as a desideratum in theological learning. Mr. Robinson, in his
second volume of Claude's Essay, has prefixed a brief dissertation on this
subject, an abridgment of which we shall here insert, with a few occasional
alterations.
From the sacred records we learn, that, when men
began to associate for the purpose of worshipping the Deity, Enoch prophesied,
Jude, 14, 15. We have a very short account of this prophet and his doctrine;
enough, however, to convince us that he taught the principal truths of natural
and revealed religion. Conviction of sin was in his doctrine, and communion
with God was exemplified in his conduct, Gen. v. 24. Heb. xi. 5, 6. From the
days of Enoch to the time of Moses, each patriarch worshipped God with his
family; probably several assembled at new moons, and alternately instructed the
whole company.--Noah, it is said, was a preacher of righteousness, 2 Pet. ii.
5. 1 Pet. iii. 19, 20. Abraham commanded his household after him to keep the
way of the Lord, and to do justice and judgment, Gen. xviii. 19; and Jacob,
when his house lapsed to idolatry, remonstrated against it, and exhorted them
and all that were with him to put away strange gods, and to go up with him to
Bethel, Gen. xxv. 2, 3. Melchisedek, also we may consider as the father, the
prince and the priest of his people, publishing the glad tidings of peace and
salvation, Gen. xviii. Heb. vii.
Moses was a most eminent prophet and preacher,
raised up by the authority of God, and by whom, it is said, came the law, John,
i. 17. This great man had much at heart the promulgation of his doctrine; he
directed it to be inscribed on pillars, to be transcribed in books, and to be
taught both in public and private by word of mouth, Deut. xxviii. 8. Deut. vi.
9. Deut. xxxi. 19. Deut. xvii. 18. Numb. v. 23, Deut. iv. 9. Himself set the
example of each; and how he and Aaron sermonized, we may see by several parts
of his writings. The first discourse was heard with profound reverence and
attention; the last was both uttered and received in raptures, Ex. iv. 31.
Deut. xxxiii. 7, 8. Public preaching does not appear under the aeconomy to have
been attached to the priesthood: priests were not officially preachers; and we
have innumerable instances of discourses delivered in religious assemblies by
men of other tribes besides that of Levi, Ps. lxviii. 11. Joshua was an
Ephraimite; but being full of the spirit of wisdom, he gathered the tribes to
Shechem, and harrangued the people of God, Deut. xxxiv. 9. Joshua, xxxiv.
Solomon was a prince of the house of Judah, Amos a herdsman of Tekoa; yet both
were preachers, and one at least was a prophet, 1 Kings, ii. Amos, vii. 14, 15.
When the ignorant notions of Pagans, the vices of their practice, and the
idolatry of their pretended worship, were in some sad periods incorporated into
the Jewish religion by the princes of that nation, the prophets and all the
seers protested against this apostacy, and they were persecuted for so doing.
Shemaiah preached to Rehoboam, the princes, and all the people, at Jerusalem, 2
Chron. xii. 5. Azariah and Hanani preached to Asa and his army, 2 Chron. xv. 1,
&c. xvi. 7. Micaiah to Ahab. Some of them opened schools, or houses of
instruction, and there to their disciples they taught the pure religion of
Moses. At Naioth, in the suburbs of Ramah, there was one, where Samuel dwelt;
there was another at Jericho, and a third at Bethel, to which Elijah and Elisha
often resorted. Thither the people went on Sabbath days and at new moons, and
received public lessons of piety and morality, 1 Sam. xix. 18. 2 Kings, ii. 3,
5. 2 Kings, iv. 2, 3. Through all this period there was a dismal confusion of
the useful ordinance of public preaching. Sometimes they had no open vision,
and the word of the Lord was precious or scarce: the people heard it only now
and then. At other times they were left without a teaching priest, and without
law. And, at other seasons again, itinerants, both princes, priests, and
Levites, were sent through all the country to carry the book of the law, and to
teach in the cities. In a word, preaching flourished when pure religion grew;
and when the last decayed, the first was suppressed. Moses had not appropriated
preaching to any order of men: persons, places, times, and manners, were all
left open and discretional. Many of the discourses were preached in camps and
courts, in streets, schools, cities, and villages, sometimes with great
composure and coolness, at other times with vehement action and rapturous
energy; sometimes in a plain blunt style, at other times in all the magnificent
pomp of Eastern allegory. On some occasions, the preachers appeared in public
with visible signs, with implements of war, yokes of slavery, or something
adapted to their subject. They gave lectures on these, held them up to view,
girded them on, broke them in pieces, rent their garments, rolled in the dust,
and endeavoured, by all the methods they could devise agreeably to the customs
of their country, to impress the minds of their auditors with the nature and
importance of their doctrines. These men were highly esteemed by the pious part
of the nation; and princes thought proper to keep seers and others, who were
scribes, who read and expounded the law, 2 Chron. xxxiv. 29, 30. xxxv. 15.
Hence false prophets, had men who found it worth while to affect to be good,
crowded the courts of princes. Jezebel, an idolatress, had four hundred
prophets of Baal; and Ahab, a pretended worshipper of Jehovah, had as many
pretended prophets of his own profession, 2 Chron. xviii. 5.
When the Jews were carried captive into Babylon,
the prophets who were with them inculcated the principles of religion, and
endeavoured to possess their minds with an aversion to idolatry; and to the
success of preaching we may attribute the re-conversion of the Jews to the belief
and worship of one God; a conversion that remains to this day. the Jews have
since fallen into horrid crimes; but they have never since this period lapsed
into idolatry, Hosea, 2d and 3d chap. Ezekiel. 2d, 3d, and 34th chap. There
were not wanting, however, multitudes of false prophets among them, whose
characters are strikingly delineated by the true prophets, and which the reader
may see in the 13th chapter of Ezekiel, 56th Isaiah, 23d Jeremiah. When the
seventy years of the captivity were expired, the good prophets and preachers,
Zerubbabel, Joshua, Haggai, and others, having confidence in the word of God,
and aspiring after their natural, civil, and religious rights, endeavoured by
all means to extricate themselves and their countrymen from that mortifying
state into which the crimes of their ancestors had brought them. They wept,
fasted, prayed, preached, prophesied, and at length prevailed. The chief
instruments were Nehemiah and Ezra: the first was governor, and reformed their
civil state; the last was a scribe of the law of the God of heaven, and
addressed himself to ecclesiastical matters, in which he rendered the noblest
service to his country, and to all posterity. He collected and collated
manuscripts of the sacred writings, and arranged and published the holy canon
in its present form. To this he added a second work as necessary as the former:
he revived and new-modelled public preaching, and exemplified his plan in his
own person. The Jews had almost lost in the seventy years' captivity their original
language: that was now become dead; and they spoke a jargon made up of their
own language and that of the Chaldeans and other nations with whom they had
been confounded. Formerly preachers had only explained subjects; now they were
obliged to explain words; words which, in the sacred code, were become
obsolete, equivocal, or dead. Houses were now opened, not for ceremonial
worship, as sacrificing, for this was confined to the temple; but for moral
obedience, as praying, preaching, reading the law, divine worship, and social
duties. These houses were called synagogues; the people repaired thither
morning and evening for prayer; and on sabbaths and festivals the law was read
and expounded to them. We have a short but beautiful description of the manner
of Ezra's first preaching, Nehemiah, viii. Upwards of fifty thousand people
assembled in a street, or large square, near the Water-gate. It was early in
the morning of a sabbath day. A pulpit of wood, in the fashion of a small
tower, was placed there on purpose for the preacher; and this turret was
supported by a scaffold, or temporary gallery, where, in a wing on the right
hand of th pulpit, sat six of the principal preachers; and in another, on the
left, seven. Thirteen other principal teachers, and many Levites, were present
also on scaffolds erected for the purpose, alternately to officiate. When Ezra
ascended the pulpit, he produced and opened the book of the law, and the whole
congregation instantly rose up from their seats, and stood. Then he offered up
prayer and praise to God, the people bowing their heads, and worshipping the
Lord with their faces to the ground; and, at the close of the prayer, with
uplifted hands, they solemnly pronounced, Amen, Amen. Then, all standing, Ezra,
assisted at times by the Levites, read the law distinctly, gave the sense, and
caused them to understand the reading. The sermons delivered so affected the
hearers, that they wept excessively; and about noon the sorrow became so
exuberant and immeasurable, that it was thought necessary by the governor, the
preacher, and the Levites, to restrain it. Go your way, said they; eat the fat,
drink the sweet, send portions unto them for whom nothing is prepared. The wise
and benevolent sentiments of these noble souls were imbibed by the whole
congregation, and fifty thousand troubled hearts were calmed in a moment. Home
they returned, to eat, to drink, to send portions and to make mirth, because
they had understood the words that were declared unto them. Plato was alive at
this time, teaching dull philosophy to cold academics; but what was he, and
what was Xenophon or Demosthenes, or any of the Pagan orators, in comparison
with these men? From this period to that of the appearance of Jesus Christ,
public preaching was universal: synagogues were multiplied, vast numbers
attended, and elders and rulers were appointed for the purpose of order and
instruction.
The most celebrated preacher that arose before
the appearance of Jesus Christ was John the Baptist. He was commissioned from
heaven to be the harbinger of the Messiah. He took Elijah for his model; and as
the times were very much like those in which that prophet lived, he chose a
doctrine and a method very much resembling those of that venerable man. His
subjects were few, plain, and important. His style was vehement, images bold,
his deportment solemn, his actions eager, and his morals strict; but this
bright morning-star gave way to the illustrious Sun of Righteousness, who now
arose on a benighted world. Jesus Christ certainly was the prince of preachers.
Who can but admire the simplicity and majesty of his style, the beauty of his
images, the alternate softness and severity of his address, the choice of his
subjects, the gracefulness of his deportment, and the indefatigableness of his
zeal? Let the reader charm and solace himself in the study and contemplation of
the character, excellency, and dignity of this best of preachers, as he will
find them delineated by the evangelists.
The apostles exactly copied their divine Master.
They formed multitudes of religious societies, and were abundantly successful
in their labours. They confined their attention to religion, and left the
school to dispute, and politicians to intrigue. The doctrines they preached,
they supported entirely by evidence; and neither had nor required such
assistance as human laws or worldly policy, the eloquoence of the schools or
the terror of arms, the charm of money or the tricks of tradesmen, could afford
them.
The apostles being dead, every thing came to pass
as they had foretold. The whole Christian system underwent a miserable change;
preaching shared the fate of other institutions, and this glory of the
primitive church was now generally degenerated. Those writers whom we call the
Fathers, however, imitation, do not deserve that indiscriminate praise ascribed
to them. Christianity, it is true, is found in their writings; but how sadly
incorporated with Pagan philosophy and Jewish allegory! It must, indeed, be
allowed, that, in general, the simplicity of Christianity was maintained,
though under gradual decay, during the three first centuries. The next five
centuries produced many pious and excellent preachers both in the Latin and
Greek churches, though the doctrine continued to degenerate. The Greek pulpit
was adorned with some eloquent orators. Basil, bishop of Caesarea, John
Chrysostom, preacher at Antioch, and afterwards patriarch (as he was called) of
Constantinople, and Gregory Nazianzen, who all flourished n the fourth century,
seem to have led the fashion of preaching in the Greek church: Jerom and
Augustin did the same in the Latin church. For some time, preaching was common
to bishops, elders, deacons, and private brethren in the primitive church: in
process, it was restrained to the bishop, and to such as he should appoint.
They called the appointment ordination; and at last attached I know not what
ideas of mystery and influence to the word, and of dominion to the bishop who
pronounced it. When a bishop or preacher travelled, he claimed no authority to
exercise the duties of his function, unless he were invited by the churches
where he attended public worship. The first preachers differed much in pulpit
action; the greater part used very moderate and sober gesture. They delivered
their sermons all extempore, while there were notaries who took down what they
said. Sermons in those days were all in the vulgar tongue. The Greeks preached
in Greek, the Latins in Latin. They did not preach by the clock (so to speak,)
but were short or long as they saw occasion, though an hour was about the usual
time. Sermons were generally both preached and heard standing; but sometimes
both speaker and auditors sat, especially the aged and the infirm. The fathers
were fond of allegory; for Origen, that everlasting allegorizer, had set them
the example. Before preaching, the preacher usually went into a vestry to pray,
and afterwards to speak to such as came to salute him. He prayed with his eyes
shut in the pulpit. The first word the preacher uttered to the people, when he
ascended the pulpit, was "Peach be with you," or "The grace of
our Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Ghost,
be with you all;" to which the assembly at first added, "Amen:"
and, in after times, they answered, "And with thy spirit."
Degenerate, however, as these days were in comparison with those of the
apostles, yet they were golden ages in comparison with the times that followed,
when metaphysical reasonings, mystical divinity, yea, Aristotelian categories,
and reading the lives of saints, were substituted in the place of sermons. The
pulpit became a stage, where ludicrous priests obtained the vulgar laugh by the
lowest kind of wit, especially at the festivals of Christman and Easter.
But the glorious reformation was the offspring of
preaching, by which mankind were informed: there was a standard, and the
religion of the times was put to trial by it. The avidity of the common people
to read Scripture, and to hear it expounded, was wonderful; and the Papists
were so fully convinced of the benefit of frequent public instruction, that
they who were justly called unpreaching prelates, and whose pulpits, to use an
expression of Latimer, had been bells without clappers for many a long year,
were obliged for shame to set up regular preaching again.
The church of Rome has produced some great
preachers since the reformation, but not equal to the reformed preachers; and a
question naturally arises here, which it would be unpardonable to pass over in
silence, concerning the singular effect of the preaching of the reformed, which
was general, national, universal reformation.
In the darkest times of popery there had arisen
now and then some famous popular preachers, who had zealously inveighed against
the vices of their times, and whose sermons had produced sudden and amazing
effects on their auditors, but all these effects had died away with the
preachers who produced them, and all things had gone back into the old state.
Law, learning, commerce, society at large, had not been improved.--Here a new
scene opens; preachers arise less popular, perhaps less indefatigable and
exemplary; their sermons produce less striking immediate effects: and yet their
auditors go away, and agree by whole nations to reform.
Jerome Savonarola, Jerome Narni, Capistran,
Connecte, and many others, had produced by their sermons, great immediate
effects. When Connecte preached, the ladies lowered their headdresses, and
committed quilled caps by hundreds to the flames. When Narni taught the populace
in Lent, from the pulpits of Rome, half the city went from his sermons, crying
along the streets, Lord have mercy upon us; Christ have mercy upon us; so that
in only one passion week, two thousand crowns worth of ropes were sold to make
scourges with; and when he preached before the pope to cardinals and bishops,
and painted the crime of non-residence in its own colours, he frightened thirty
or forty bishops who heard him, instantly home to their dioceses. In the pulpit
of the university of Salamanca he induced eight hundred students to quit all
worldly prospects of honour, riches, and pleasures, and to become penitents in
divers monasteries. Some of this class were martyrs too. We know the fate of
Savonarrola, and more might be added: but all lamented the momentary duration
of the effects produced by their labours. Narni himself was so disgusted with
his office, that he renounced preaching, and shut himself up in his cell to
mourn over his irreclaimable contemporaries; for bishops went back to court, and
rope-makers lay idle again.
Our reformers taught all the good doctrines which
had been taught by these men, and they added two or three more, by which they
laid the axe to the root of apostacy, and produced general information. Instead
of appealing to popes, and canons, and founders, and fathers, they only quoted
them, and referred their auditors to the Holy Scriptures for law. Pope Leo X.
did not know this when he told Prierio, who complained of Luther's heresy.
Friar Martin had a fine genius! They also taught the people what little they
knew of Christian liberty; and so led them into a belief that they might follow
their own ideas in religion, without the consent of a confessor, a diocesan, a
pope, or a council. They went farther, and laid the stress of all religion on
justifying faith. This obliged the people to get acquainted with Christ, the
object of their faith; and thus they were led into the knowledge of a character
altogether different from what they saw in their old guides; a character which
it is impossible to know, and not to admire and imitate. The old papal popular
sermons had gone off like a charge of gunpowder, producing only a fright, a
bustle, and a black face; but those of the nerve learninge, as the monks called
them, were small hearty seeds, which, being sown in the honest hearts of the
multitude, and watered with the dew of heaven, softly vegetated, and
imperceptibly unfolded blossoms and fruits of inestimable value.
These eminent servants of Christ excelled in
various talents, both in the pulpit and in private. Knox came down like a
thunder-storm; Calvin resembled a whole day's set rain; Beza was a shower of
the softest dew. Old Latimer, in a coarse frieze gown, trudged afoot, his
Testament hanging at one end of his leathern girdle, and his spectacles at the
other, and without ceremony instructed the people in rustic style from a hollow
tree; while the courtly Ridley in satin and fur taught the same principles in
the cathedral of the metropolis. Crammer, though a timorous man, ventured to
give king Henry the Eighth a New Testament, with the label, Whoremongers and
adulterers God will judge; while Knox, who said, there was nothing in the
pleasant face of a lady to affray him, assured the queen of Scots, that,
"If there were any spark of the Spirit of God, yea, of honesty and wisdom
in her, she would not be offended with his affirming in his sermons, that the
diversions of her court were diabolical crimes--evidences of impiety or
insanity." These men were not all accomplished scholars; but they all gave
proof enough that they were honest, hearty, and disinterested in the cause of
religion.
All Europe produced great and excellent
preachers, and some of the more studious and sedate reduced their art of public
preaching to a system, and taught rules of a good sermon. Bishop Wilkins
enumerated, in 1646, upwards of sixty who had written on the subject. Several
of these are valuable treatises, full of edifying instructions; but all are on
a scale too large, and, by affecting to treat of the whole office of a
minister, leave that capital branch, public preaching, unfinished and vague.
One of the most important articles of pulpit
science, that which gives life and energy to all the rest, and without which
all the rest are nothing but a vain parade, either neglected or exploded in all
these treatises. It is essential to the ministration of the divine word by
public preaching, that preachers be allowed to form principles of their own,
and that their sermons contain their real sentiments, the fruits of their own
intense thought and meditation. Preaching cannot be in a good state in those
communities, where the shameful traffic of buying and selling manuscript
sermons is carried on. Moreover, all the animating encouragements that arise from
a free unbiased choice of the people, and from their uncontaminated,
disinterested applause, should be left open to stimulate a generous youth to
excel. Command a man to utter what he has no inclination to propagate, and what
he does not even believe; threaten him, at the same time, with all the miseries
of life, if he dare to follow his own ideas, and to promulgate his own
sentiments, and you pass a sentence of death on all he says. He does declaim;
but all is lanquid and cold, and he lays his system out as an undertaker does
the dead.
Since the reformers, we have had multitudes who
have entered into their views with disinterestedness and success; and, in the
present times, both in the church and among dissenters, names could be
mentioned which would do honour to any nation; for though there are too many
who do not fill up that important station with proportionate piety and talents,
yet we have men who are conspicuous for their extent of knowledge, depth of
experience, originality of thought, fervency of zeal, consistency of
deportment, and great usefulness in the Christian church. May their numbers
still be increased, and their exertions in the cause of truth be eminently
crowned with the divine blessing! See Robinson's Claude, vol. ii. preface; and
books recommended under article MINISTER.
A denomination given to the inhabitants of the
earth, conceived by some people to have lived before Adam.
Isaac de la Pereyra, in 1655, published a book to
evince the reality of Preasamites, by which he gained an considerable number of
proselytes to the opinion: but the answer of Demarets, professor of theology at
Groningen, published the year following, put a stop to its progress, though
Pereyra made a reply.
His system was this. The Jews he calls Adamites,
and supposes them to have issued from Adam; and gives the title Preadamites to
the Gentiles, whom he supposes to have been a long time before Adam. But this
being expressly contrary to the first words of Genesis, Pereyra had recourse to
the fabulous antiquities of the Egyptians and Chaldeans, and to some idle
rabbins, who imagined there had been another world before that described by
Moses. He was apprehended by the inquisition in Flanders, and very roughly
used, though in the service of the dauphin. But he appealed from their sentence
to Rome, whither he went in the time of Alexander VII., and where he printed a
retraction of his book of Preadamites.
The arguments against the Preadamites are these.
The sacred history of Moses assures us that Adam and Eve were the first persons
that were created on the earth, Gen. i. 26. Gen. ii. 7. Our Saviour confirmed
this when he said, "From the beginning of the creation God made them, male
and female," Mark, x. 6. It is undeniable that he speaks this of Adam and
Eve, because in the next verse he uses the same words as those in Gen. ii. 24.
"Therefore shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave unto his
wife." It is also clear from Gen. iii. 20, where it is said, that
"Adam called his wife's name Eve, because she was the mother of all
living," that is, she was the source and root of all men and women in the
world; which plainly intimates that there was no other woman that was such a mother.
Finally, Adam is expressly called twice, by the apostle Paul, the first man, 1
Cor. xv. 45, 47.
A rule given by a superior; a direction or command. The precepts of religion, says Saurin, are not essential as the doctrines; and religion will as certainly sink, if the morality be subverted, as if the theology be undermined. The doctrines are only proposed to us as the ground of our duty. See DOCTRINE.
Those who believe in predestination. See PREDESTINATION.
Is the decree of God, whereby he hath for his own glory fore-ordained whatever comes to pass. The verb predestinate is of Latin original (praedestino,) and signifies in that tongue to deliberate before-hand with one's self how one shall act, and, in consequence of such deliberation, to constitute, fore-ordain, and predetermine, where, when, how, and by whom any thing shall be done, and to what end it shall be done. So the Greek word whish exactly answers to the English word predestinate, and is rendered by it, signifies to resolve before-hand with one's self what shall be done, and before the thing resolved on is actually effected; to appoint it to some certain use, and direct it to some determinate end. This doctrine has been the occasion of considerable disputes and controversies among divines. On the one side it has be observed, that it is impossible to reconcile it with our ideas of the justice and goodness of God, that it makes God to be the author of sin, destroys moral distinction, and renders all our efforts useless. Predestinarians deny these consequences, and endeavour to prove this doctrine from the consideration of the perfections of the divine nature, and from Scripture testimony. If his knowledge, say they, be infinite and unchangeable, he must have known every thing from eternity. If we allow the attribute of prescience, the idea of a decree must certainly be believed also, for how can an action that is really to come to pass be foreseen, if it be not determined? God knew every thing from the beginning; but this he could not have known if he had not so determined it. If, also, God be infinitely wise, it cannot be conceived that he would leave things at random, and have no plan. He is a God of order, and this order he observes as strictly in the moral as in the natural world, however conceived otherwise of God, is to degrade him, and is an insult to his perfections. If he, then, be wise and unchangeable, no new idea or purpose can arise in his mind; no alteration of his plan can take place, upon condition of his creatures acting in this or that way. To say that this doctrine makes him the author of sin, is not justifiable. We all allow omnipotence to be an attribute of Deity, and that by this attribute he could have prevented sin from entering into the world, had he chosen it; yet we see he did not. Now he is no more the author of sin in one case than the other. May we not ask, Why does he suffer those inequalities of Providence? Why permit whole nations to lie in idolatry or ages? Why leave men to the most cruel barbarities? Why punish the sins of the fathers in the children? In a word, Why permit the world at large to be subject to pains, crosses, losses, evils of every kind, and that for so many thousands of years? And, yet, will any dare call the Deity unjust? The fact is, our finite minds know but little of the nature of divine justice, or any other of his attributes. But, supposing there are difficulties in this subject (and what subject is without it?) the Scripture abounds with passages which at once prove the doctrine, Matt. xxv. 34. Rom. viii. 29, 30. Eph. i. 3, 6, 11. 2 Tim. i. 9. 2 Thess. ii. 13. 1 Pet. i. 1, 2. John vi. 37. John xvii. 2 to 24. Rev. xiii. 8. Rev. xvii. 8. Dan. iv. 35. 1 Thess. v. 19. Matt. xi. 26. Exod. iv. 21. Prov. xvi. 4. Acts xiii. 48. the moral uses of this doctrine are these. 1. It hides pride from man.--2. Excludes the idea of chance.--3. Exalts the grace of God.--4. Renders salvation certain.--5. Affords believers great consolation. See DECREES OF GOD; NECESSITY; King, Toplady, Cooper, and Tucker, on Predestination; Burnet on 17 Art.; Whitby and Gill on the Five Points; Wesley's Pred. considered; Hill's Logica Wesleinsis; Edwards on the Will; Polhill on the Decrees; Edwards's Veritas Redux; Saurin's Sermons, vol. v. ser. 13; Dr. William's Serm on Pred.
Is his existence before he was born of the
Virgin Mary. That he really did exist before, is plain from John iii. 13. John
vi. 50. &c. John xvii. John viii. 58. 1 John i. 4: but there are various
opinions respecting this existence. Some acknowledge, that in Jesus Christ
there is a divine nature, a rational soul, and a human body. His body, they
think, was formed in the Virgin's womb; his human soul, they suppose, was the
first and most excellent of all the works of God; was brought into existence
before the creation of the world, and subsisted in happy union in heaven with
the second person in the Godhead, till his incarnation. These divines differ
from those called Arians, for the latter ascribe to Christ only a created
deity, whereas the former hold his true and proper divinity: they differ from
the Socinians, who believe no existence of Christ before his incarnation: they
differ from the Sabillians, who only own a trinity of names: they differ, also,
from the generally received opinion, which is, that the human soul began to
exist in his mother's womb, in exact conformity to that likeness unto his
brethren, of which St. Paul speaks, Heb. ii. 17. The writers in favour of the
pre-existence of Jesus Christ's human soul recommend their thesis by these
arguments.
I. Christ is represented as his Father's
messenger, or angel, being distinct from his Father, sent by his Father long
before his incarnation, to perform actions which seem to be too low for the
dignity of pure Godhead. The appearances of Christ is to the patriarchs are
described like the appearances of an angel, or man really distinct from God;
yet such a one, in whom God, or Jehovah, had a peculiar indwelling, or with
whom the divine nature had a personal union.
2. Christ, when he came into the world, is said,
in several passages of Scripture, to have divested himself of some glory which
he had before his incarnation. Now if there had existed before this time
nothing but his divine nature, this divine nature could not properly divest
itself of any glory. I have glorified thee on earth; I have finished the work
thou gavest me to do. And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self,
with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.--Ye know the grace
of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became
poor, that ye through his poverty might be rich, John xvii. 4, 5. 2 Cor. viii.
9. It cannot be said of God that he became poor: he is infinitely
self-sufficient; he is necessarily and eternally rich in perfections and glories.
Nor can it be said of Christ as man, that he was rich, if he were never in a
richer state before, than while he was on earth.
It seems needful that the soul of Christ should
pre-exist, that it might have an opportunity to give its previous actual
consent to the great and painful undertaking of atonement for our sins. It was
the human soul of Christ that endured the weakness and pain of his infant
state, all the labours and fatigues of life, the reproaches of men, and the
sufferings of death. The divine nature is incapable of suffering. The covenant
of redemption between the Father and the Son is therefore represented as being
made before the foundation of the world. To suppose that simple deity or the
divine essence, which is the same in all the three personalities, should make a
covenant with itself, is inconsistent.
Christ is the angel to whom God was in a peculiar
manner united, and who in this union made all the divine appearances related in
the Old Testament.
God is often represented in Scripture as
appearing in a visible manner, and assuming a human form. See Gen. iii. 8.
xvii. 1. xxviii. 12. xxxii. 24. Exod. ii. 2, and a variety of other passages.
The Lord Jehovah, when he came down to visit men,
carried some ensign of divine majesty: he was surrounded with some splendid
appearance. Such a light often appeared at the door of the tabernacle, and
fixed its abode on the ark, between the cherubims. It was by the Jews called
the Shekinah, i. e. the habitation of God. Hence he is described as dwelling in
light and clothed with light as with a garment. In the midst of this brightness
there seems to have been sometimes a human shape and figure. It was probably of
this heavenly light that Christ divested himself when he was made flesh. With
this he was covered at his transfiguration in the Mount, when his garments were
white as the light; and at his ascension into heaven, when a bright cloud
received, or invested him: and when he appeared to John, Rev. i. 13. and it was
with this he prayed his Father would glorify him.
Sometimes the great and blessed God appeared in
the form of a man or angel. It is evident that the true God resided in this man
or angel; because on account of this union to proper deity, the angel calls
himself God, the Lord God. He assumes the most exalted names and characters of
Godhead. And the spectators, and sacred historians, it is evident, considered
him as true and proper God: they paid him the highest worship and obedience. He
is properly styled the angel of God's presence.--The (messenger or) angel of
the covenant, Isa. lxxii. 1. Mal. iii. 1.
The same angel of the Lord was the particular God
and King of the Israelites. It was he who made a covenant with the patriarchs,
who appeared to Moses in the burning bush, who redeemed the Israelites from
Egypt, who conducted them through the wilderness, who gave the law at Sinai,
and transacted the affairs of the ancient church.
The angels who have appeared since our blessed
Saviour became incarnate, have never assumed the names, titles, characters, or
worship, belonging to God. Hence we may infer that the angel who, under the Old
Testament, assumed divine titles, and accepted religious worship, was that
peculiar angel of God's presence, in whom God resided, or who was united to the
Godhead in a peculiar manner; even the pre-existent soul of Christ, who
afterwards took flesh and blood upon him, and was called Jesus Christ on earth.
Christ represents himself as one with the Father:
I and the Father are one, John, x. 30. xiv. 10, 11. There is, we may hence
infer, such a peculiar union between God and the man Christ Jesus, both in his
pre-existent and incarnate state, that he may be properly called God-man in one
complex person.
Among those expressions of Scripture which
discover the pre-existence of Christ, there are several from which we may
derive a certain proof of his divinity. Such are those places in the Old
Testament, where the angel who appeared to the ancients is called God, the
Almighty God, Jehovah, the Lord of Hosts, I am that I am, &c.
Dr. Watts supposes, that the doctrine of the
pre-existence of the soul of Christ explains dark and difficult scriptures, and
discovers many beauties and proprieties of expression n the word of God, which
on any other plan lie unobserved: For instance, in Col. i. 15, &c. Christ
is described as the image of the invisible God, the first-born of every
creature. His being the image of the invisible God cannot refer merely to his
divine nature; for that is as invisible in the Son as in the Father: therefore
it seems to refer to his pre-existent soul in union with the Godhead. Again:
when man is said to be created in the image of God, Gen. i. 2. it may refer to
the God-man, to Christ in his pre-existent state. God says, Let us make man in
our image, after our likeness. The word is redoubled, perhaps to intimate that
Adam was made in the likeness of the human soul of Christ, as well as that he
bore something of the image and resemblance of the divine nature.
On the other side it is affirmed, that this
doctrine of the pre-existence of the human soul of Christ weakens and subverts
that of his personality. 1. A pure intelligent spirit, say they, the first, the
most ancient, and the most excellent of creatures, created before the
foundation of the world, so exactly resembles the second person of the Arian
trinity, that it is impossible to show the least difference, except in
name.--2. The pre-existent intelligence supposed in this doctrine, is so
confounded with those other intelligences called angels, that there is great
danger of mistaking this human soul for an angel, and so of making the person
of Christ to consist of three natures.--3. If Jesus Christ had nothing in
common like the rest of mankind except a body, how could this semi-conformity
make him a real man?--4. The passages quoted in proof of the pre-existence of
the human soul of Jesus Christ are of the same sort with those which others
allege in proof of the pre-existence of all human souls.--5. This opinion, by ascribing
the dignity of the work of redemption to this sublime human soul, detracts from
the deity of Christ, and renders the last as passive as the first active.--6.
This notion is contrary to Scripture. St. Paul says, in all things it behoved
him to be made like his brethren: he partook of all our infirmities, except
sin. St. Luke says, he increased in stature and in wisdom, Heb. ii. 17. Luke,
ii. 52. See articles JESUS CHRIST, and INDWELLING SCHEME; Robinson's Claude,
vol. i. p. 214, 311; Watts's Works, vol. v. p. 274, 385; Gill's Body of Div.
vol. ii. p. 51; robinson's Plea, p. 140; Fleming's Christology; Simpson's
Apology for the Trin. p. 190; Hawker's Ser. on the Divinity of Christ, p. 44,
45.
Or PREMONSTRATENSES, a religious order of
regular canons, instituted in 1120 by S. Norbert, and thence called
Norbertines. The rule they followed was that of St. Augustine with some slight
alterations, and an addition of certain severe laws, whose authority did not
long survive their founder.
They first came into England A. D. 1146. Their
first monastery, called New-house, was erected in Lincolnshire, by Peter de
Saulia, and dedicated to St. Martial. In the reign of Edward I. this order had
twenty-seven monasteries in England.
See next article; and articles DEACON, ELDER.
The title Presbyterian comes from the Greek word
which signifies senior or elder, intimating that the government of the church
in the New Testament was by presbyteries, that is, by association by
presbyteries, that is, by association of ministers and ruling elders, possessed
all of equal powers, without any superiority among them, either in office or
order. The Presbyterians believe, that the Gospel, to administer the sacraments
of baptism and the Lord's supper, and to feed the flock of Christ, is derived from
the Holy Ghost by the imposition of the hands of the presbytery; and they
oppose the independent scheme of the common rights of Christians by the same
arguments which are used for that purpose by the Episcopalians. They affirm,
however, that there is no order in the church as established by Christ and his
apostles superior to that of presbyters; that presbyter and bishop, though
different words, are of the same import; and that prelacy was gradually
established upon the primitive practice of making the moderator or speaker of
the presbytery a permanent officer.
These positions they maintain against the
Episcopalians by the following Scriptural arguments.--They observe, That the
apostles planted churches by ordaining bishops and deacons in every city; that
the ministers which in one verse are called bishops, are in the next perhaps
denominated presbyters; that we no where read in the New Testament of bishops,
presbyters, and deacons, in any one church; and that, therefore, we are under
the necessity of concluding bishop and presbyter to be two names for the same
church officer. This is apparent from Peter's exhortation to the elders or
presbyters who were among the Jewish Christians. 'The elders (presbyters) which
are among you I exhort, who am also an elder, and a witness of the sufferings
of Christ, and also a partaker of the glory that shall be revealed: feed the
flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof, (acting as
bishops thereof,) not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but
of a ready mind; neither as being LORDS over God's heritage, but being
ensamples to the flock, 1 Pet. v. 2, 3. From this passage it is evident that
the presbyters not only fed the flock of God, but also governed that flock with
episcopal powers; and that the apostle himself, as a church officer, was
nothing more than a presbyter or elder. The identity of the office of bishop
and presbyter is still more apparent from Heb. xiii. 7, 17. and 1 Thess. v. 12;
for the bishops are there represented as governing the flock, speaking to them
the word of God, watching for their souls, and discharging various offices,
which it is impossible for any man to perform to more than one congregation.
"From the last cited text it is evident that
the bishops of the Thessalonian churches had the pastoral care of no more souls
than they could hold personal communion with in God's worship; for they were
such as all the people were to know, esteem, and love, as those that not only
were over them, but also 'closely laboured among them, and admonished them.'
But diocesan bishops, whom ordinarily the hundredth part of their flock never
hear nor see, cannot be those bishops by whom that flock is admonished; nor can
they be what Peter requires the bishops of the Jewish converts to be, ensamples
to the flock. It is the opinion of Dr. Hammond, who was a very learned divine,
and a zealot for episcopacy, that the elders whom the apostle James desires
(Jam. v. 14.) the sick to call for, were of the highest permanent order of ecclesiastical
officers; but it is self-evident that those elders cannot have been diocesan
bishops, otherwise the sick must have been often without the reach of the
remedy proposed to them.
"There is nothing in Scripture upon which the
Episcopalian is more ready to rest his cause than the alleged episcopacy of
Timothy and Titus, of whom the former is said to have been bishop of Ephesus,
and the latter bishop of Crete; yet the Presbyterian thinks it is clear as the
noon-day sun, that the presbyters of Ephesus were supreme governors, under
Christ, of the Ephesian churches, at the very time that Timothy is pretended to
have been their proper diocesan.
"In Acts, xx. 17, &c. we read, that
'from Miletus Paul sent to Ephesus, and called the elders (presbyters) of the
church. And when they were come to him, he said unto them, Ye know, from the
first day that I came into Asia, after what manner I have been with you at all
seasons. And now, I know that ye all, among whom I have gone preaching the
kingdom of God, shall see my face no more. Wherefore I take you to record this
day, that I am pure from the blood of all men. For I have not shunned to
declare unto you all the counsel of God. Take heed, therefore unto yourselves,
and to all the flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers
(bishops) to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own
blood. For I know this, that after my departure shall grievous wolves enter in
among you, not sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men arise,
speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them. Therefore watch,
and remember that, by the space of three years, I ceased not to warn every one
night and day with tears. And now, brethren, I commend you to God, and to the
word of his grace,' &c.
"From this passage it is evident that there
was in the city of Ephesus a plurality of pastors of equal authority, without
any superior pastor or bishop over them; for the apostle directs his discourse
to them all in common, and gives them equal power over the whole flock. Dr.
Hammond, indeed, imagines, that the elders whom Paul called to Miletus, were
the bishops of Asia, and that he sent for them to Ephesus, because that city
was the metropolis of this province. But, were this opinion well founded, it is
not conceivable that the sacred writer would have called them the elders of the
church of Ephesus, but the elders of the church in general, or the elders of
the churches in Asia. Besides, it is to be remembered, that the apostle was in
such haste to be at Jerusalem, that the sacred historian measures his time by
days; whereas it must have required several months to call together the bishops
or elders of all the cities of Asia; and he might certainly have gone to meet
them at Ephesus in less time than would be requisite for their meeting in that
city, and proceeding thence to him at Miletus. They must therefore have been
either the joint pastors of one congregation, or the pastors of different
congregations in one city; and as it was thus in Ephesus, so it was in
Philippi; for we find the apostle addressing his epistle 'to all the saints in
Jesus Christ which are at Philippi, with the bishops and deacons.' From the
passage before us it is likewise plain, that the presbyters of Ephesus had not
only the name, but the whole power of bishops given to them by the Holy Ghost;
for they are enjoined to do the whole work of bishops which signifies to rule
as well as feed the church of God. Whence we see that the apostle makes the
power of governing inseparable from that of preaching and watching; and that,
according to him, all who are preachers of God's word, and watchmen of souls,
are necessarily rulers or governors of the church, without being accountable
for their management to any prelate, but only to their Lord Christ, from whom
their power is derived.
"It appears, therefore, that the apostle
Paul, left in the church of Ephesus, which he had planted, no other successors
to himself than presbyter-bishops, or Presbyterian ministers, and that he did
not devolve his power upon any prelate. Timothy, whom the Episcopalians allege
to have been the first bishop of Ephesus, was present when this settlement was
made, Acts, xx. 5; and it is surely not to be supposed that, had he been their
bishop, the apostle would have desolved the whole episcopal power upon the
presbyters before his face. If ever there were a season fitter than another for
pointing out the duty of this supposed bishop to his diocese, and his
presbyters' duty to him, it was surely when Paul was taking his final leave of
them, and discoursing so pathetically concerning the duty of overseers, the
coming of ravenous wolves, and the consequent hazard of the flock. In this
farewell discourse he tells them that 'he had not shunned to declare unto them
all the counsel of God.' But with what truth could this have been said, if
obedience to a diocesan bishop had been any part of their duty, either at the
time of the apostle's speaking, or at any future period? He foresaw that
ravenous wolves would enter in among them, and that even some of themselves
should arise speaking perverse things; and if, as the Episcopalians allege,
diocesan episcopacy was the remedy provided for these evils, is it not strange,
passing strange, that the inspired preacher did not foresee that Timothy, who
was then standing beside him, was destined to fill that important office: or,
if he did foresee it, that he ommitted to recommend him to his future charge,
and to give him proper instructions for the discharge of his duty?
"But if Timothy was not bishop of Ephesus,
what, it may be asked, was his office in that city? for that he resided there
for some time, and was by the apostle invested with authority to obtain and
rebuke presbyters, are facts about which all parties are agreed, and which,
indeed, cannot be controverted by any reader of Paul's epistles. To this the
Prebyterian replies, with confidence, that the power which Timothy exercised in
the church of Ephesus was that of an evangelist, Tim. ii. 4,5. and not a fixed
prelate. But, according to Eusebius, the work of an evangelist was, 'to lay the
foundations of the faith in barbarous nations, and to constitute among them
pastors, after which he passed on to other countries.' Accordingly we find that
Timothy was resident for a time at Philippi and Corinth (Phil. ii. 19. 1 Cor.
iv. 17. xvi. 10, 11.) as well as Ephesus, and that he had as much authority
over those churches as over that of which he is said to have been the fixed
bishop. 'Now, if Timotheus come, see that he may be with you without fear, for
he worketh the work of the Lord, as I also do. Let no man, therefore, despise
him.' This text might lead us to suppose that Timothy was bishop of Corinth as
well as of Ephesus; for it is stronger than that upon which his episcopacy of
the latter church is chiefly built. The apostle says, 1 Tim. i. 3. 'I besought
thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into Macedonia, that thou mightest
charge some that they teach no other doctrine.' But, had Timothy been the fixed
bishop of that city, there would surely have been no necessity for beseeching
him to abide with his flock. It is to be observed, too, that the first epistle
to Timothy, which alone was written to him during his residence at Ephesus, was
of a date prior to Paul's meeting with the elders of that church at Miletus;
for in the epistle he hopes to come to him shortly; whereas he tells the elders
at Miletus that they should see his face no more. This being the case, it is
evident that Timothy was left by the apostle at Ephesus only to supply his
place during his temporary absence at Macedona; and that he could not possibly
have been constituted fixed bishop of that church, since the episcopal powers
were afterwards committed to the presbyters by the Holy Ghost in his presence.
"The identity of the office of bishop and
presbyter being thus clearly established, it follows, that the presbyterate is
the highest permanent office in the church, and that every faithful pastor of a
flock is successor to the apostles in every thing in which they were to have
any successors. In the apostolic office there were indeed some things peculiar
and extraordinary, such as their immediate call by Christ, their infallibility,
their being witnesses of our Lord's resurrection, and their unlimited jurisdiction
over the whole world. These powers and privileges could not be conveyed by
imposition of hands to any successors, whether called presbyters or bishops;
but as rulers or office-bearers in particular churches, we have the confession
of 'the very chiefest apostles,' Peter and John, that they were nothing more
than presbyters, or parish ministers. This being the case, the dispute which
has been so warmly agitated concerning the validity of Presbyterian ordination
may be soon decided; for if the ceremony of ordination be at all essential, it
is obvious that such a ceremony performed by presbyters must be valid, as there
is no higher order of ecclesiastics in the church by whom it can be performed.
Accordingly we find, that Timothy himself, though said to be a bishop, was
ordained by the laying on of the hands of a presbytery. At that ordination,
indeed, St. Paul presided, but he could preside only as primus in paribus; for
we have seen that, as permanent officers in the church of Christ, the apostles themselves
were no more than presbyters. If the apostles' hands were imposed for any other
purpose, it must have been to communicate those charismata, or miraculous gifts
of the Holy Spirit, which were then so frequent; but which no modern presbyter
or bishop will pretend to give, unless his understanding be clouded by the
grossest ignorance, or perverted by the most frantic enthusiasm."
The members of the church of Scotland are strict
Presbyterians. Their mode of ecclesiastical government was brought thither from
Geneva by John Knox, the famous Scotch reformer, and who has been styled the
apostle of Scotland.
Their doctrines are Calvinistic, as may be seen
in the confession of faith, and the larger and shorter catechisms; though it is
supposed that the clergy, when composing instructions, either for their
respective parishes, or the public at large, are no more fettered by the
confession than the clergy of the church of England are by the thirty-nine
articles. Many in both communities, it seems, take a more extensive latitude
than their formulaa allow them.
As to the church government among the Scotch
Presbyterians, no one is ignorant, that, from the first dawn of the reformation
among us till the aera of the revolution, there was a perpetual struggle
between the court and the people, for the establishment of an episcopal or a
presbyterian form: the former model of ecclesiastical polity was patronised by
the house of Stuart on account of the support which it gave to the prerogatives
of the crown; the latter was the favourite of the majority of the people,
perhaps not so much on account of its superior claim to apostolical
institution, as because the laity are mixed with the clergy in church
judicatories, and the two orders, which under episcopacy are kept so distinct,
incorporated, as it were, into one body. In the Scottish church, every
regulation of public worship, every act of discipline, and every ecclesiastical
censure, which in other churches flows from the authority of a diocesan bishop,
or from a convocation of the clergy, is the joint work of a certain number of
clergymen and laymen acting together with equal authority, and deciding every
question by a plurality of voices. The laymen who thus form an essential part
of the ecclesiastical courts of Scotland are called ruling elders, and hold the
same office, as well as the same name, with those brethren (Acts xv.) who
joined with the apostles and elders at Jerusalem in determining the important
question concerning the necessity of imposing upon the Gentile converts the
ritual observances of the law of Moses. These lay-elders Paul enjoined Timothy,
( 1 Tim. v. 17.) to account worthy of double honour, if they should rule well,
and discharge the duties for which they were separated from the multitude of
their brethren. In the church of Scotland every parish has two or three of
those lay-elders, who are grave and serious persons chosen from among the heads
of families, of known orthodoxy, and steady adherence to the worship,
discipline, and government of the church. Being solemnly engaged to use their
utmost endeavours for the suppression of vice and the cherishing of piety and
virtue, and to exercise discipline faithfully and diligently, the minister, in
the presence of the congregation, sets them apart to their office by solemn
prayer; and concludes the ceremony, which is sometimes called ordination, with
exhorting both elders and people to their respective duties.
The kirk session, which is the lowest
ecclesiastical judicatory, consists of the minister and those elders of the
congregation. The minister is ex officio moderator, but has no negative voice
over the decision of the session; nor, indeed, has he a right to vote at all,
unless when the voice of the elders are equal and opposite. He may, indeed,
enter his protest against their sentence, if he think it improper, and appeal
to the judgment of the presbytery; but this privilege belongs equally to every
elder, as well as to every person who may believe himself aggrieved by the
proceedings of the session. The deacons, whose proper office it is to take care
of the poor, may be present in every session, and offer their counsel on all
questions that come before it; but, except in what relates to the distribution
of alms, they have no decisive vote with the minister and elders.
The next judicatory is the presbytery, which
consist of all the pastors within a certain district, and one ruling elder from
each parish, commissioned by his brethren to represent, in conjunction with the
minister, the session of that parish. The presbytery treats of such matters as
concern the particular churches within its limits; as the examination,
admission, ordination, and censuring of ministers; the licensing of
probationers, rebuking the gross or contumacious sinners, the directing the
sentence of excommunication, the deciding upon references and appeals from kirk
sessions, resolving cases of conscience, explaining difficulties in doctrine or
discipline; and censuring, according to the word of God, any heresy or
erroneous doctrine which hath either been publicly or privately maintained
within the bounds of its jurisdiction. Some of them have frankly acknowledged
that they cannot altogether approve of that part of her constitution which
gives an equal vote, in questions of heresy, to an illiterate mechanic and his
enlightened pastor. We are persuaded (say they) that it has been the source of
much trouble to many a pious clergyman, who from the laudable desire of
explaining the Scriptures, and declaring to his flock all the counsel of God,
has employed a variety of expressions of the same import to illustrate those
articles of faith, which may be obscurely expressed in the established
standards. The fact, however, is, that in presbyters the only prerogatives
which the pastors have over the ruling elders are, the power of ordination by
imposition of hands, and the privilege of having the moderator chosen from
their body.
From the judgment of the presbytery there lies an
appeal to the provincial synod, which ordinarily meets twice in the year, and
exercises over the presbyteries within the province a jurisdiction similar to
that which is vested in each presbytery over the sever kirk session within its
bounds. Of these synods there are in the church of Scotland fifteen, which are
composed of the members of the several presbyteries within the respective
provinces which give names to the synods.
The highest authority in the church of Scotland
is the general assembly, which consists of a certain number of ministers and
ruling elders delegated from each presbytery, and of commissioners from the
universities and royal boroughs. A presbytery in which there are fewer than
twelve parishes sends to the general assembly two ministers and one ruling
elder; if it contain between twelve and eighteen ministers, it sends three of
these, and one ruling elder; if it contain between eighteen and twenty-four
ministers, it sends four ministers, and two ruling elders; and of twenty-four
ministers, when it contains so many, it sends five, with two ruling elders.
Every royal borough sends one ruling elder, and Edinburgh two, whose election
must be attested by the kirk sessions of their respective boroughs. Every
university sends one commissioner from its own body. The commissioners are chosen
annually six weeks before the meeting of the assembly; and the ruling elders
are often men of the first eminence in the kingdom for rank and talents. In
this assembly, which meets once a year, the king presides by his commissioner,
who is always a nobleman, but he has no voice in their deliberations. The order
of their proceedings is regular, though sometimes the number of members creates
a confusion; which the moderator, who is chosen from among the ministers to be,
as it were, the speaker of the house, has not sufficient authority to prevent.
Appeals are brought from all the other ecclesiastical courts in Scotland to the
general assembly; and in questions purely religious, no appeal lies from its
determinations. See Hall's View of a Gospel Church; Enc. Brt. art.
Presbyterians; Brown's Vindication of the Presbyterian Form of Church
Government; Scotch Confession and Directory. For the other side of the
question, and against Presbyterian church government, see articles BROWNISTS,
CHURCH CONGREGATIONAL, EPISCOPACY, and INDEPENDENTS.
CUMBERLAND, this is a body of Presbyterians who
principally reside in the states of Kentucky and Tennessee, and in the adjacent
territories.
They constituted a presbytery separate from the
Kentucky synod and general presbyterian church, on the 10th of February, 1810.
The causes that led to this are as follow:
About the year 1799 or 1800, God revived religion
in a remarkable manner in the western country, through the instrumentality of
some presbyterian preachers; consequently, many new congregations were soon
formed and organized. But to continue to supply them all, by the then licensed
and ordained ministers was impracticable.
A venerable father in the ministry who came from
a distance, discovering the necessity for supplies, proposed to the preachers
who were engaged in promoting the revival, to choose from amongst the laity
some men (whose talents, gifts, piety, &c. would justify such a step,) and
encourage them to prepare for the work of the ministry: though they might not
have a classical education. This proposition was readily acceded to, and
several persons were spoken to on the subject, and encouraged to improve their
talent by exhortation, and to prepare written discourses to exhibit to the next
Transylvania presbytery, as specimens of their abilities to sermonize, &c.
with which they accordingly complied. The discourses were read to the aged
member who first recommended the measure, and tolerably well approved. They
were not now received as candidates for the ministery, but were directed to
prepare other discourses to read to the next presbytery, where the debate
became very animated, whether they should be admitted as candidates for the
holy ministry; when finally a majority of one vote decided, one of them only
should be received at that time. The next presbytery, however, decided by a
large majority in favour of the proposed plan; and accordingly, after hearing
popular trials, &c. proceeded to license three men, to wit:--Alexander
Anderson, Finis Ewing, and Samuel King, to preach the Gospel as probationers.
These men, although two of them had no knowledge of the dead languages; yet
from their discourses, extempore, as well as written, and from the petitions of
hundreds of serious Christians, praying that they might be licensed; the
presbytery thought they could not be out of their duty in promoting them to the
work of the ministry; in which opinion they were afterwards fully confirmed.
Some members of this presbytery, however, as well as the preceding, were
opposed to the measure, who entered their protest, and wrote to the synod, who,
at first, paid but little attention to it. About this time the Transylvania
presbytery was divided, and the former, Cumberland presbytery, constituted, in
which there were always a decided majority in favour of licensing men to preach
the Gospel (when need required, and God called) who were "apt to
teach," and sound in the faith, though they might not possess a liberal
education. Therefore, from time to time they licensed, (some of whom they
ordained,) men of that description. This measure was still opposed by that part
of the presbytery who were unfriendly to the revival. The synod took the
matter, and appointed a commission of their own body to meet in the bounds of
the Cumberland presbytery, and directed the members thereof, with all their
licentiates, candidates, and exhorters, to meet; which summons the greater part
of them obeyed. After the commission and the accused had met, the former
exhibited many charges against the latter; principally taken from the minutes
of the presbytery and public fame: all of which were chiefly comprised in the
two following, to wit:--1st, Licensing men to preach who had not been examined
on the languages. 2d, That those men who were licensed, both learned and less
learned, had been only required to adopt the confession of faith partially,
that is, as far as they believed it to agree with God's word.
As to the first ground of complaint, the
presbytery not only plead the exception in the discipline, in
"extraordinary cases," but also the example of a number of the
presbyteries in different parts of the United States. They moreover, appealed
to a higher authority than either of the foregoing, which was the New
Testament, and inquired if there be any precept or example in that Book which
condemns the practice of licensing what they (the commission) called unlearned
men. It was also asked, if God could not as easily call a Presbyterian not
classically learned, to preach the Gospel, as he could such of any other
denomination?
With respect to doctrines; the presbytery
believed their candidates had departed from no essential doctrine taught in the
confession of faith; and therefore ought to have been indulged in their
conscientious scruples about tenets not essential or important. This reasoning,
however, was not satisfactory to the commission, who demanded all the young men
to be given up to them for re-examination. The presbytery refused; viewing the
demand unprecedented, and directly making dangerous encroachments on the
liberties and privileges of presbyteries, who, according to the discipline,
were sole judges of the faith and qualifications of their own candidates for
the ministry. The young men then being summoned to submit, and refusing, the
commission proceeded solemnly to prohibit them all, learned and less learned,
from preaching or administering any more as Presbyterians; and summoned the
majority of the presbytery to appear at their next synod, to answer for not
surrendering their young brethren, and to be examined themselves on doctrines.
The presbytery thought it a very extraordinary step indeed, for a commission of
the synod to silence, or prohibit, a number or respectable and useful ministers
of Jesus, without process or trial, men, whose moral characters were
unexceptionable, and who had never been called before their own presbytery to
answer any charge; and men, who were never convicted of either heresy,
immorality, or contumacy, before any judicature whatsoever. The presbytery
being conscious that the commission had acted illegally, determined to petition
the general assembly. In the mean time they formed themselves into a council;
intending, with their young brethren, to promote religion as well as they could
in that capacity; refraining from presbyterial acts, until they could learn the
decision of the assembly; the first decision of which appeared favourable. This
encouraged the council to expect the assembly would eventually redress their
grievances. They therefore waited and petitioned, until they were convinced by
an act, or decision of the assembly, that the synod were justified in their
unconstitutional and unprecedented conduct toward the young preachers, which, (after
another fruitless application to the synod and Transylvania presbytery)
determined three of the remaining ordained ministers to constitute a separate
presbytery; which was done in the following manner:
"In Dickson County, Tennessee State, at the
Rev. S. M'Adow's, this 4th day of February, 1810:"
"We, Samuel M'Adow, Finis Ewing, and Samuel
King, regularly ordained ministers in the Presbyterian church, against whom no
charge either of immorality or heresy has ever been exhibited, before any church
judicatures; having waited in vain more than four years; in the mean time
petitioning the General Assembly for a redress of grievances, and a restoration
of our violated rights, have, and do hereby agree and determine, to constitute
a Presbytery, known by the name of the Cumberland Presbytery, on the following
conditions:"
All candidates for the ministry who may hereafter
be licensed by this presbytery, and all licentiates or probationers who may
hereafter be ordained by this presbytery, shall be required before such
licensure and ordination, to receive and adopt the confession and discipline *
of the presbyterian church, except the idea of fatality that seems to be taught
under the mysterious doctrine of predestination.
It is to be understood, however, that such as can
adopt the confession without such exception, shall not be required to make any.
Moreover, all licentiates, before they are set apart to the whole work of the
ministry, (ordained) shall be required to undergo an examination on English
Grammar, Geography, Astronomy, natural and moral Philosophy, and Church
History.! The presbytery may also require an examination on all or any part of
the above branches of literature before licensure, if they deem it expedient.
Doctrines. It has been already observed, that the
Presbyterian confession is their confession, "except the idea of
fatality." But as some may think this too indefinite, it may be proper
here to state explicitly all the essential doctrines or tenets they hold.
1st, That Adam was made upright, pure and free;
that he was necessarily under the moral law, which binds all intelligences; and
having transgressed it, he was consequently, with all his posterity, exposed to
eternal punishment and misery.
2d, That Christ the second Adam represented just
as many as the first, consequently made an atonement for all, "which will
be testified in due time." But that the benefit of that atonement will be
only received by the true believer.
3d, That all Adam's family are totally depraved,
"conceived in sin; going astray from the womb, and all children of
wrath;" therefore must "be born again," justified and
sanctified, or they never can enter into the kingdom of God.
4th, That justification is by faith alone as the
INSTRUMENT; by the merits of Christ's active and passive obedience, as the
meritorious cause; and by the operation of God's Spirit as the efficient, or
active cause.
5th, That as the sinner is justified on the
account of Christ's righteousness being imputed or accounted to him; on the
same account he will be enabled to go on from one degree of grace to another,
in a progressive life of sanctification, until he is fit to be gathered into
the garner of God, who will certainly take to glory every man who has been really
justified: that is, he, Christ, has become wisdom, (light to convince,)
righteousness, (to justify) sanctification, (to cleanse) and redemption, (to
glorify,) to every truly regenerated soul.
6th, That there are three persons in one God,
coequal, essential, and eternal; or the Father, Word, and Holy Ghost: that the
mediator is very God and very man; two distinct natures in one person;
therefore while the humanity obeys and suffers, there is infinite worth or
merit given to that obedience and suffering, by the union of the divinity.
They dissent from the Confession--in, 1st, That
there are no eternal reprobates.--2d, That Christ died not for a part only, but
for all mankind.--3d, That all infants, dying in infancy are saved through
Christ, and sanctification of the Spirit.--4th, That the Spirit of God operates
on the world, or as co-extensively as Christ has made the atonement, in such a
manner as to leave all men inexcusable.
As to the doctrines of predestination and
election, they think, (with many eminent and modest divines who have written on
the subject,) they are mysterious, and they are not well pleased with the
application that rigid Calvinists, or Arminians make of them. They think the
truth, or that, as well as many other points in divinity, lies between the
opposite extremes. They are confident however, that those doctrines should not,
on the one hand be so construed as to make any thing the creature has done, or
can do, at all meritorious in his salvation; or to lay any ground to say
"well done I;" or to take the least degree of the honour of our
justification and perseverance from God's unmerited grace, and Christ's pure
righteousness. On the other hand, they are equally confident those doctrines
should not be so construed as to make God the author of sin, directly or
indirectly; either of Adam's sin, or any subsequent sin of his fallen race; or
to contradict the express and repeated declarations of God's word, on the
extent of the atonement and operations of the Spirit; or to contradict the
sincerity of God's expostulations with sinners, and make his oath to have no
meaning, when he swears he has no pleasure in their death; or to resolve the
whole character of the Deity into his sovereignty, without a due regard to all
other of his adorable attributes. Finally, they think those doctrines ought to
be thought and spoken of in a consistency with God's moral government, which
always has for its object the happiness of his intelligent creatures, when it
consists with his justice and the honour of the divine throne.
Discipline. Their discipline is Presbyterian.
Their congregations are governed by church sessions, presbyteries, and they now
have appointed to constitute a synod to be called the Cumberland Synod. They
are tenacious of the presbyterial form of church government; because they
believe it to be equitable, just, and scriptural; and because it tends to
cherish in their minds, and the minds of their congregations, a love of civil,
as well as religious liberty; its being so congenial to the republican form of
government established in these United States; which stands equally aloof from
monarchy and anarchy.
On the subject of their deviation from the old
rule with respect to literary qualification for the ministry, they would not be
understood as undervaluing that precious handmaid to the useful work of a
Gospel minister. They have in two publications called "a circular
letter," and "a reply," given abundant evidence of their anxiety
to acquire and promote useful knowledge; by recommending the study of the Greek
scriptures, and by their exertion to procure a circulating library of
theological, historical, and scientific books, which they are increasing from
time to time. Notwithstanding they are persuaded that God has and does call
many to preach the Gospel, who have no knowledge of the original languages, and
who have been and are eminently useful in their profession. They have therefore
dispensed with that condition, as not being absolutely necessary; yet they
recommend it, when it can conveniently be acquired. From pursuing this course
they have, as might be expected, some learned and some less learned preachers
of the everlasting Gospel: the latter of whom appear in many instances, to be
as useful in promoting the word of God as the former.
Progress. Since they first constituted a separate
presbytery they have made considerable progress. At first there were but nine
preachers in the connection, four of whom only were ordained.
At that time their organized congregations were
but few; but since, they have increased to about eighty, exclusive of a number
not yet organized. Their preachers have increased from nine to eighteen,
fourteen of whom are ordained; and there are now about ten candidates for the
ministry. At their stated session in April 1813, they divided their body into
three presbyteries, and appointed to constitute a synod on the first Wednesday
in October following. they have pursued the itinerant mode of preaching the
Gospel, which appears to have a good effect, and to be the best in a frontier
country. The demand for preaching, however, is increasing faster than their
preachers.
They continue to observe a custom which was
introduced early in the glorious revival in that country, which is, to encamp
on the ground at their communion for four days and nights: and it has been
remarked that they have rarely had a communion since they constituted, but more
or less have given satisfactory evidence of having become subjects of vital
religion. Sometimes, however, there are but few, at other times, there are as
many as thirty or forty, who have made a credible profession of faith in the
Lord Jesus. A great part of their increase consists of new converts, whose
lives and conversation manifest "they have been with Jesus."
While God thus evidently owns their humble
efforts to spread a savour of his name, they hope to bear with firmness all the
opposition they may meet, from individuals or sectaries.
P.S. When they receive candidates for the
ministry, they allow them to exercise their gift in public speaking, under the
immediate eye of the church; thereby they are better able to judge of their
"aptness to teach," than they could be by their written discourses
alone, which they require also.
* The reception of the disciple is to be
understood in conformity to the branches of literature required by this body.
! It will not be understood that examination on
Theology, experimental religion, and a call to the ministry, will be omitted.
The appellation Presbyterian in England is appropriated to a body of dissenters, who have not any attachment to the Scotch mode of church government any more than to episcopacy among us; and therefore the term Presbyterian is here improperly applied. How this misapplication came to pass cannot be easily determined; but it has occasioned many wrong notions, and should therefore be rectified. English Presbyterians, as they are called, adopt nearly the same mode of church government with the Independents. Their chief difference from the Independents is, that they are less attached to Calvinism.
The reformed presbytery in Scotland trace their origin as far back as the reformation, and consider themselves, as the only pure Presbyterians since the revolution. They profess to adhere to the solemn league and covenant agreed to by the nation before the restoration, in which they abjure popery and prelacy, and resolve to maintain and defend the doctrines, worship, discipline, and government of the church, as approved by the parliament and assembly at Westminster, and by the general assembly of the church and parliament of Scotland, 1645-9. It seems, they object not so much to a religious establishment, but to the religious establishment as it exists; they object not to an alliance of the church with the state, but to the alliance of the church with an uncovenanted king and government. Their number, it is said, amounts to about four thousand persons.
Is his foreknowledge, or that knowledge which God has of things to come. The doctrine of predestination is founded on the prescience of God, and on the supposition of all futurity being present to him. Properly speaking, indeed, prescience follows that of predestination; for if we allow that God from all eternity foresaw all things, he must thus have foreseen them in consequence of his permitting or fore-appointing them. Hence events are not certain merely because foreknown; but foreknown because antecedently certain on account of pre-determining reasons. See FOREKNOWLEDGE, PREDESTINATION.
In theology, was a kind of argument pleaded by Tertullian and others in the third century against erroneous doctors. This mode of arguing has been despised by some, both because it has been used by Papists, and because they think that truth has no need of such a support. Others, however, think that if it can be shown that any particular doctrine of Christianity was held in the earliest ages, even approaching the apostolic, it must have very considerable weight; and, indeed, that it has so, appears from the universal appeals of all parties to those early times in support of their particular opinions. Besides, the thing is in itself natural; for if a man finds a variety of opinions in the world upon important passages in Scripture, where shall he be so apt to get the true sense as from contemporary writers or others who lived very near the apostolic age? And if such a man shall find any doctrine or interpretations to have been universally believed in the first ages, or, as Vicentius Lirinensis words it, semper ubique et ab omnibus, he will unquestionably be disposed to think such early and universal consent, or such prescription, of very considerable weight in determining his opinion.
As it relates to the mind, is a supposition formed before examination. As it relates to the conduct or moral action, it implies arrogance and irreverence. As it relates to religion in general, it is a bold and daring confidence in the goodness of God, without obedience to his will. Presumptious sins must be distinguished from sins of infirmity, or those failings peculiar to human nature, Ecc. vi. 20. 1 John i. 8, 9; from sins done through ignorance, Luke xii. 48; and from sins into which men are hurried by sudden and violent temptation, Gal. vi. 1. The ingredients which render sin presumptuous are, knowledge, John, xv. 22; deliberation and contrivance, Prov. vi. 14. Psal. xxxvi. 4; obstinacy, Jer. xliv. 16. Deut. i. 13; inattention to the remonstrances of conscience, Acts, vii. 51; opposition to the dispensations of Providence, 2 Chron. xxviii. 22; and repeated commission of the same sin, Psal. lxxviii. 17. Presumptuous sins are numerous; such as profane swearing, perjury, theft, adultery, drunkeness, sabbath-breaking, &c. These may be more particularly considered as presumptuous sins, because they are generally committed against a known law, and so often repeated. Such sins are most heinous in their nature, and most pernicious in their effects. They are said to be a reproach to the Lord, Numb. xv. 3; they harden the heart, 1 Tim. iv. 2; draw down judgments from heaven, Numb. xv. 31; even when repented of, are seldom pardoned without some visible testimony of God's displeasure, 2 Sam. xii. 10. As it respects professors of religion, as one observes, they sin presumptuously, 1. when they take up a profession of religion without principle; 2. when they profess to ask the blessing of God, and yet go on in forbidden courses; 3. when they do not take religion as they find it in the Scriptures; 4. when they make their feelings the test of their religion, without considering the difference between animal passions and the operations of the Spirit of God; 5. when they run into temptation; 6. when they indulge in self-confidence and self-complacency; 7. when they bring the spirit of the world into the church; 8. when they form apologies for that in some which they condemn in others; 9. when professing to believe in the doctrines of the Gospel, they live licentiously; 10. when they create, magnify, and pervert their troubles; 11. when they arraign the conduct of God as unkind and unjust. See R. Walker's Ser. vol. i. ser. 3; South's Ser. vol. vii. ser. 10, 11, and 12; Tillotson's Ser. ser. 147; Saurin's Ser. ser. 11. vol. i. robinson's translation; Bp. Hopkins on the Nature, Danger, and Cure of Presumptuous sins. See his works.
Is inordinate and unreasonable self-esteem, attended with insolence, and rude treatment of others. "It is sometimes," says a good writer, "confounded with vanity, and sometimes founded with vanity, and sometimes with dignity; but to the former passion it has no resemblance, and in many circumstances it differs from the latter. Vanity is the parent of loquacious boasting; and the person subject to it, if his pretences be admitted, has no inclination to insult the company. The proud man, on the other hand, is naturally silent, and, wrapt up in his own importance, seldom speaks but to make his audience feel their inferiority." Pride is the high opinion that a poor little contracted soul entertains of itself. Dignity consists in just, great, and uniform actions, and is the opposite to meanness.--2. Pride manifests itself by praising ourselves, adorning our persons, attempting to appear before others in a superior light to what we are; contempt and slander of others; envy at the excellencies others possess; anxiety to gain applause; distress and rage when slighted; impatience of contradiction, and opposition to God himself.--3. The evil effects of pride are beyond computation. It has spread itself universally in all nations, among all characters; and as it was the first sin, as some suppose, that entered into the world, so it seems the last to be conquered. It may be considered as the parent of discontent, ingratitude, covetousness, poverty, presumption, passion, extravagance, bigotry, war, and persecution. In fact, there is hardly an evil perpetrated but what pride is connected with it in a proximate or remote sense.--4. To suppress this evil, we should consider what we are. "If we could trace our descents," says Seneca, "we should find all slaves to come from princes, and all princes from slaves. To be proud of knowledge, is to be blind in the light; to be proud of virtue, is to poison ourselves with the antidote; to be proud of authority, is to make our rise our downfall." The imperfection of our nature, our scanty knowledge, contracted powers, narrow conceptions, and moral inability, are strong motives to excite us to humility. We should consider also, what punishment this sin has brought on mankind. See the cases of Pharaoh, Haman, Nebuchadnezzar, Herod, and others. How particularly it is prohibited, Prov. xvi. 18. 1 Pet. v. 5. James iv. 6. Prov. xxix. 23; what a torment it is to its possessor, Esther v. 13; how soon all things of a sublunary nature will end; how disgraceful it renders us in the sight of God, angels, and men; what a barrier it is to our felicity and communion with God; how fruitful it is of discord; how it precludes our usefulness, and renders us really contemptible. See HUMILITY.
A person set apart for the performance of sacrifice,
and other offices and ceremonies of religion. Before the promulgation of the
law of Moses, the first-born of every family, the fathers, the princes, and the
kings, were priests. Thus Cain and Abel, Noah, Abraham, Melchizedec, Job,
Isaac, and Jacob, offered themselves their own sacrifices. Among the
Israelites, after their departure from Egypt, the priesthood was confined to
one tribe, and it consisted of three orders, the high-priest, priests, and
Levites. The priesthood was made hereditary in the family of Aaron; and the
first-born of the oldest branch of that family, if he had no legal blemish, was
always the high-priest. This divine appointment was observed with considerable
accuracy till the Jews fell under the dominion of the Romans, and had their
faith corrupted by a false philosophy. Then, indeed, the high-priesthood was
sometimes set up to sale, and, instead of continuing for life, as it ought to
have done, it seems, from some passages in the New Testament, to have been
nothing more than an annual office. There is sufficient reason, however, to
believe, that it was never disposed of but to some descendant of Aaron capable
of filling it, had the older branches been extinct. (For the consecration and
offices of the Jewish priesthood, we refer our readers to the books of Moses.)
In the time of David, the inferior priests were divided into twenty-four
companies, who were to serve in rotation, each company by itself, for a week.
The order in which the several courses were to serve was determined by lot; and
each course was, in all succeeding ages, called by the name of its original
chief.
It has been much disputed, whether in the
Christian church there be any such officer as a priest, in the proper sense of
the word. If the word priest be taken to denote a person commissioned by divine
authority to offer up a real sacrifice to God, we may justly deny that there is
a priest upon earth. Under the Gospel, there is but one priest, which is
Christ: and but one sacrifice, that of the cross. The church of Rome, however,
erroneously believe their priests to be empowered to offer up to the Divine
Majesty a real proper sacrifice, as were the priests under the Old Testament.
Ecclesiastical history informs us that, in the second century, some time after
the feign of the emperor Adrian, when the Jews, by the second destruction of
Jerusalem, were bereaved of all hopes of the restoration of their government to
its former lustre, the notion that the ministers of the Christian church
succeeded to the character and prerogatives of the Jewish priesthood, was
industriously propagated by the Christian doctors; and that, in consequence,
the bishops claimed a rank and character similar to that of the Jewish
high-priest; the presbyters to that of the priests; and the deacons to that of
the Levites. One of the pernicious effects of this groundless comparison and
pretension seems to have been, the introduction of the idea of a real sacrifice
in the Christian church, and of sacrificing priests.
In the church of England, the word priest is
retained to denote the second order in her hierarchy, but we believe with very
different significations, according to the different opinions entertained of
the Lord's supper. Some few of her divines, of great learning, and of undoubted
protestantism, maintain that the Lord's supper is a commemorative and
eucharistical sacrifice. These consider all who are authorized to administer
that sacrament as in the strictest sense priests. Others hold the Lord's supper
to be a feast upon the one sacrifice, once offered on the cross; and these,
too, must consider themselves as clothed with some kind of priesthood. Great
numbers, however, of the English clergy, perhaps the majority, agree with the
church of Scotland, in maintaining that the Lord's supper is a rite of no other
moral import than the mere commemoration of the death of Christ. These cannot
consider themselves as priests in the rigid sense of the word, but only as
presbyters, of which the word priest is a contraction of the same import with elder.
See LORD'S SUPPER.
The highest post in the church. The Romanists
contend that St. Peter, by our Lord's appointment, had a primacy of sovereign
authority and jurisdiction over the apostles. This, however, is denied by the
Protestants, and that upon just grounds. Dr. Barrow observes, (Works, vol. i.
p. 557,) that there are several sorts of primacy which may belong to a person
in respect of others. 1. A primacy of worth or personal excellency.--2. A
primacy of reputation and esteem.--3. A primacy of order or bare dignity and
precedence.--4. A primacy of power and jurisdiction. As for the first of these,
a primacy of worth, we may well grant it to Peter, admitting that probably he
did exceed the rest of his brethren in personal endowments and capacities;
particularly in quickness of apprehension, boldness of spirit, readiness of
speech, charity to our Lord, and zeal for his service.--2. As to the primacy of
repute, which St. Paul means when he speaks of those who had a special
reputation, of those who seemed to be pillars, of the supereminent apostles,
Gal. ii. 6, 9. 2 Cor. xi. 5. xii. 11. this advantage cannot be refused him,
being a necessary consequent of those eminent qualities resplendent in him, and
of the illustrious performances achieved by him beyond the rest. This may be
inferred from that renown which he hath had from the beginning; and likewise
from his being so constantly ranked in the first place before the rest of his
brethren.--3. As to a primacy of order or bare dignity, importing that commonly
in all meetings and proceedings, the other apostles did yield him the
precedence, may be questioned; for this does not seem suitable to the gravity
of such persons, of their condition and circumstances, to stand upon ceremonies
of respect; for out Lord's rules seem to exclude all semblance of ambition, all
kind of inequality and distance between his apostles. But yet this primacy may
be granted as probable upon divers accounts of use and convenience; it might be
useful to preserve order, and to promote expedition, or to prevent confusion,
distraction, and dilatory obstruction in the management of things.--4. As to a
primacy importing a superiority in command, power or jurisdiction, this we have
great reason to deny upon the following considerations. 1. For such a power it
was needful that a commission from God, its founder, should be granted in
absolute and perspicuous terms; but no such commission is extant in
Scripture.--2. If so illustrious an office was instituted by our Saviour, it is
strange, that no where in the evangelical or apostolical history there should
be any express mention of that institution.--3. If St. Peter had been
instituted sovereign of the apostolical senate, his office and state had been
in nature and kind very distinct from the common office of the other apostles,
as the office of a king from the office of any subject; and probably would have
been signified by some distinct name, as that of arch-apostle, arch-pastor, the
Vicar of Christ, or the like; but no such name or title was assumed by him, or
was by the rest attributed to him.--4. There was no office above that of an
apostle, known to the apostles or primitive church, Eph. iv. 11. 1 Cor. xii.
28.--5. Our Lord himself declared against this kind of primacy, prohibiting his
apostles to affect, to seek, to assume, or admit a superiority of power one
above another, Luke xxii. 14-24. Mark ix. 35.--6. We do not find any peculiar
administration committed to St. Peter, nor any privilege conferred on him which
was not also granted to the other apostles, John xx. 23. Mark xvi. 15.--7. When
Peter wrote two catholic epistles, there does not appear in either of them any
intimation or any pretence to this arch-apostolical power.--8. In all relations
which occur in Scripture about controversies incident of doctrine or practice,
there is no appeal made to St. Peter's judgment or allegation of it as
decisive, no argument is built on his authority.--9. St. Peter no where appears
intermeddling as a judge or governor paramount in such cases; yet where he doth
himself deal with heretics and disorderly persons, he proceedeth not as a pope
decreeing; but as an apostle, warming, arguing and persuading against
them.--10. The consideration of the apostles proceeding in the conversion of
people, in the foundation of churches, and in administration of their spiritual
affairs, will exclude any probability of St. Peter's jurisdiction over them.
They went about their business, not by order or licence from St. Peter, but,
according to special direction of God's Spirit.--11. The nature of the
apostolic ministry, their not being fixed in one place of residence, but
continually moving about the world; the state of things at that time, and the
manner of St. Peter's life, render it unlikely that he had such a jurisdiction
over the apostles as some assign him.--12. It was indeed most requisite that
every apostle should have a complete, absolute, independent authority in
managing the duties and concerns of the office, that he might not any wise be
obstructed in the discharge of them, not clogged with a need to consult others,
not hampered with orders from those who were at a distance.--13. The discourse
and behaving of St. Paul towards St. Peter doth evidence that he did not
acknowledge any dependence on him, or any subjection to him, Gal. ii. 11.--14.
If St. Peter had been appointed sovereign of the church, it seems that it
should have been requisite that he should have outlived all the apostles; for
otherwise, the church would have wanted a head, or there must have been an
inextricable controversy who that head was. But St. Peter died long before St.
John, as all agree, and perhaps before divers others of the apostles.
From these arguments we must evidently see what
little ground the church of Rome hath to derive the supremacy of the pope from
the supposed primacy of St. Peter.
An archbishop who is invested with a jurisdiction over other bishops. See ARCHBISHOP.
Those who lived in the first ages of Christianity, especially the apostles and immediate followers of our Lord.
An essential truth from which others are derived: the ground or motive of action. See DISPOSITION and DOCTRINE.
The head of a convent; next in dignity to an abbot.
The followers of Priscillian, in the fourth century. It appears from authentic records, that the difference between their doctrine and that of the Manicheans was not very considerable. For they denied the reality of Christ's birth and incarnation; maintained that the visible universe was not the production of the Supreme Deity, but of some daemon or malignant principle; adopted the doctrines of aeons, or emanations from the divine nature; considered human bodies as prisons formed by the author of evil to enslave celestial minds; condemned marriage, and disbelieved the resurrection of the body. Their rule of life and manners was rigid and severe; the accounts, therefore, which many have given of their lasciviousness and intemperance deserve not the least credit, as they are totally destitute of evidence and authority. That the Priscillianists were guilty of dissimulation upon some occasions, and deceived their adversaries by cunning stratagems, is true; but that they held it as a maxim, that lying and perjury were lawful, is a most notorious falsehood, without even the least shadow of probability.
honesty, sincerity, or veracity. "It consists in the habit of actions useful to society, and in the constant observance of the laws which justice and conscience impose upon us. The man who obeys all the laws of society with an exact punctuality, is not, therefore, a man of probity: laws can only respect the external and definite parts of human conduct; but probity respects our more private actions, and such as it is impossible in all cases to define; and it appears to be in morals what charity is in religion. Probity teaches us to perform in society those actions which no external power can oblige us to perform, and is that quality in the human mind from which we claim the performance of the rights commonly called imperfect."
A ceremony in the Romish church, consisting of a
formal march of the clergy and people, putting up prayers, &c. and in this
manner visiting some church, &c. They have processions of the host or
sacrament; of our Saviour to mount Calvary; of the Rosary, &c.
Processions are said to be of Pagan original. The
Romans, when the empire was distressed, or after some victory, used constantly
to order processions, for several days together, to be made to the temples, to
beg the assistance of the gods, or to return them thanks.
The first processions mentioned in ecclesiastical
history, are those set on foot at Constantinople, by St. Chrysostom. The Arians
of that city, being forced to hold their meetings without the town, went
thither night and morning, singing anthems. Chrysostom, to prevent their
perverting the Catholics, set up counter-processions, in which the clergy and
people marched by night, singing prayers and hymns, and carrying crosses and
flambeaux. From this period the custom of processions was introduced among the
Greeks, and afterwards among the Latins; but they have subsisted longer, and
been more frequently used in the Western than in the Eastern church.
A term made use of in reference to the Holy
Ghost, as proceeding from the Father, or from the Father and the Son. It seems
to be founded on that passage in John xv. 26. "When the Comforter is come,
whom I will send unto you from the Father, He shall testify of me." The
procession of the Holy ghost, it is said, is expressly taught by Christ, in
very strong terms, in this text. This procession, it is alleged, is here
evidently distinguished from his mission; from the Father, even the Spirit of
Truth, which proceeds from the Father." If his mission and proceeding were
the same thing, there would be a tautology in the words, his mission, according
to that interpretation, being mentioned twice in the same verse. Dr. Watts,
however, observes, that the procession of the Holy Ghost from the Father,
respects not his nature or substance, but his mission only; and that no
distinct and clear ideas can be formed of this procession; consequently it must
be given up as popish, scholastic, inconceivable, and indefensible. But, it is
answered, what clear idea can be given us of the originate, self-existent,
eternal being of the Father? Shall we, therefore, deny him to be without
beginning or end, and to be self-existent, because we know not how he is so? If
not, why must we give up the procession of the Spirit, because we know not the
mode of it. We can no more explain the manner how the Spirit proceeds from the
Father, than we can explain the eternal generation and hypostatical union of
the two natures of the Son. We may say to the objector, as Gregory Nazianzen
formerly did to his adversary, "Do you tell me how the Father is
unbegotten, and I will attempt to tell you how the Son is begotten, and the
Spirit proceeds."
The clearest and fullest account of this
procession, next to that in the above-mentioned text, is that in 1 Cor. ii. 12.
"The Spirit which is of God;" that is (say the advocates for this
doctrine,) the Spirit which is the same in nature and essence with the Father,
and so is said to be of him, or out of him, not as to local separation, but
with respect to identity of nature.
About the eighth and ninth centuries there was a
very warm dispute between the Greek and Latin churches, whether the Spirit
proceeded from the Father only, or from the Father and the Son; and the
controversy arose to such a height, that they charged one another with heresy
and schism, when neither side well understood what they contended for. The
Latin church, however, has not scrupled to say that the Spirit proceeds from
the Father and the Son; but the Greek church chooses to express it thus: the
Spirit proceeds from the Father by or through the Son, or he receives of the
Son, Gal. iv. 6. See HOLY GHOST; Bishop Pearson on the Creed, p. 324; Watts's
Works, 8vo. ed. vol. v. p. 199; Hurrion on the Holy Spirit, p. 204; Ridgley's
div. qu. 11; Dr. Lightfoot's Works, vol. i.p. 482.
A term used in opposition to holy; and in general is applied to all persons who have not the sacred character, and to things which do not belong to the service of religion.
Among the Romanists, denotes the entering into a
religious order, whereby a person offers himself to God by a vow of inviolably
observing obedience, chastity, and poverty.
Christians are required to make a profession of
their faith, 1. Boldly, Rom. i. 16.--2. Explicitly, Matt. v. 16.--3.
Constantly, Heb. x. 23.--4. Yet not ostnetatiously, but with humility and
meekness.
A term commonly used in the religious world, to denote any person who makes an open acknowledgment of the religion of Christ, or who outwardly manifests his attachment to Christianity. All real Christians are professors, but all professors are not real Christians. In this, as in all other things of worth and importance, we find counterfeits. There are many who become professors, not from principle, from investigation, from love to the truth; but from interested motives, prejudice of education, custom, influence of connections, novelty, &c. as Saul, Jehu, Judas, Demas, the foolish virgins, &c. See article CHRISTIAN: Jay's Sermons, ser. 9; Mead's Almost Christian; Bellamy's True Religion delineated; Shepherd's Sincere Convert, and on the Parable of the Ten Virgins; Secker's Nonsuch Professor.
Is a solemn asseveration, by which one pledges
his veracity that he shall perform, or cause to be performed, the thing which
he mentions.
The obligation of promises arises from the
necessity of the well-being and existence of society. "Virtue
requires," as Dr. Doddridge observes, "that promises be fulfilled.
The promisee, i. e. the person to whom the promise is made, acquires a property
in virtue of the promise. The uncertainty of property would evidently be
attended with great inconvenience. By failing to fulfil my promise, I either
show that I was not sincere in making it, or that I have little constancy or
resolution, and either way injure my character and consequently my usefulness
in life. Promises, however, are not binding, 1. If they were made by us before
we came to such exercise of reason as to be fit to transact affairs of moment;
or if by any distemper or sudden surprise we are deprived of the exercise of
our reason at the time when the promise is made.--2. If the promise was made on
a false presumption, in which the promiser, after the most diligent inquiry,
was imposed upon, especially if he were deceived by the fraud of the
promise.--3. If the thing itself be vicious; for virtue cannot require that
vice should be committed.--4. If the accomplishment of the promise be so hard
and intolerable, that there is reason to believe that, had it been foreseen, it
would have been not accepted, or if it depend on conditions not
performed." See Doddridge's Lec. lec. 69; Grot. de Jure, lib. il. cap. 11;
Paley's Mor. Phil. ch. 5. vol. 1; Grove's Mor. Phil. vol. ii. p. 2. c. 12;
Watts's Ser. ser. 20.
Are the kind declarations of his word, in which he hath assured us he will bestow blessings upon his people. The promises contained in the sacred Scriptures may be considered, 1. Divine as to their origin.--2. Suitable as to their nature.--3. Abundant as to their number.--4. Clear as to their expression.--5. Certain as to their accomplishment. The consideration of them should, 1. Prove an antidote to despair.--2. A motive to patience.--3. A call for prayer.--4. A spur to perseverance. See Clark on the Promises, a book that Dr. Watts says, "he could dare put into the hands of every Christian, among all their divided sects and parties in the world." Buck's Serm. ser. xi.
A word in its original import signifies the
prediction of future events. It is thus defined by Witsins: "A knowledge
and manifestation of secret things, which a man knows not from his own
sagacity, nor from the relation of others, but by an extraordinary revelation
of God from heaven." In the Old and New Testaments the word is not always
confined to the foretelling of future events. In several instances it is of the
same import with preaching, and denotes the faculty of illustrating and
applying to present practical purposes the doctrines of prior revelation. Thus,
in Nehemiah it is said, "Thou hast appointed prophets to preach," ch.
vi. ver 7; and whoever speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and
comfort, is by St. Paul called a prophet, 1 Cor. xiv. 3. Hence it was that
there were schools of prophets in Israel, where young men were instructed in the
truths of religion, and fitted to exhort and comfort the people. It is
prophecy, however, according to the first definition given above, we shall here
consider.
Prophecy (with the power of working miracles) may
be considered as the highest evidence that can be given of a supernatural
communion with the Deity. Hence, among the professors of almost every religious
system, there have been numberless pretenders to the gift of prophecy. Pagans
had their oracles, augurs, and soothsayers; modern idolaters their necronancers
and diviners; and the Jews, Christians, and Mahometans, their prophets. The
pretensions of Pagans and impostors, have, however, been justly exposed; while
the Jewish and Christian prophecies carry with them evident marks of their validity.
Hence St. Peter observes,"We have a more sure word of prophecy, whereunto
we do well to take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place; for the
prophecy came not in old time by the will of man, but holy men of God spake as
they were moved by the Holy Ghost." 2 Pet. ii. 19, 21. Scripture prophecy,
therefore, hath God for its origin. It did not arise from the genius of the
mind, the temperament of the body, the influence of the stars, &c. but from
the sovereign will of God. The ways by which the Deity made known his mind were
various; such as by dreams, visions, angels, symbolic representations, impulses
on the mind, Numb. xii. 6. Jer. xxxi. 26. Dan. viii. 16, 17.
As to the language of prophecy: "It
is," says Mr. Gray, "remarkable for its magnificence. Each prophetic
writer is distinguished for peculiar beauties; but their style in general may
be characterised as strong, animated, and impressive. Its ornaments are derived
not from accumulation of epithet, or laboured harmony; but from the real
grandeur of its images, and the majestic force of its expressions. It is varied
with striking propriety, and enlivened with quick but easy transitions. Its
sudden bursts of eloquence, its earnest warmth, its affecting exhortations and
appeals, affords very interesting proofs of that lively impression, and of that
inspired conviction, under which the prophets wrote; and which enable them,
among a people not distinguished for genius, to surpass, in every variety of
composition, the most admired productions of Pagan antiquity. If the imagery
employed by the sacred writers appears sometimes to partake of a coarse and
indelicate cast, it must be recollected, that the Eastern manners and languages
required the most forcible representations; and that the masculine and
indignant spirit of the prophets led them to adopt the most energetic and
descriptive expressions. No style is, perhaps, so highly figurative as that of
the prophets. Every object of nature and of art which could furnish allusions
is explored with industry; every scene of creation, and every page of science,
seems to have unfolded its rich varieties to the sacred writers, who, in the
spirit of Eastern poetry, delight in every kind of metaphorical embellishment.
Thus, by way of illustration, it is obvious to remark, that earthly dignities
and powers are symbolized by the celestial bodies; the effects of moral evil
are shown under the storms and convulsions of nature; the pollutions of sin are
represented by external impurities; and the beneficial influence of
righteousness is depicted by the serenity and confidence of peaceful life. This
allegorical language, being founded in ideas universally prevalent, and adhered
to with invariable relation and regular analogy, has furnished great ornament
and elegance to the sacred writings. Sometimes, however, the inspired penmen
drew their allusions from local and temporary sources of metaphor; from the
peculiar scenery of their country; from the idolatries of heathen nations; from
their own history and circumstances; from the service of their temple, and the
ceremonies of their religion; from manners that have faded, and customs that
have elapsed. Hence many appropriate beauties have vanished. Many descriptions
and many representations, that must have had a solemn importance among the
Jews, are now considered, from a change of circumstances, in a degraded point
of view. Hence, likewise, here and there a shade of obscurity. In general,
however, the language of Scripture, though highly sublime and beautiful, is
easy and intelligible to all capacities."
2. Of the use and intent of prophecy. As prophecy
is so striking a proof of Deity, and is of so early a date, we may rest assured
it was given for wise and important ends. "It cannot be supposed,"
says bishop Sherlock, "that God delivered prophecies only to satisfy or
employ the curiosity of the inquisitive, or that he gave his Spirit to men
merely to enable them to give forth predictions for the amusement and
entertainment of the world: there must be some end worthy of the author."
Now, what end could this be, but to keep alive in the minds of those to whom it
was given, a sense of religion, and a hope of future deliverance from the curse
of the fall through Jesus Christ? "The uses of prophecy," says Dr.
Jortin, "besides gradually opening and unfolding the things relating to
the Messiah, and the blessings which by him should be conferred upon mankind,
are many, great, and manifest.
"1. It served to secure the belief of a God,
and of a providence.
"As God is invisible and spiritual, there
was cause to fear, that, in the first and ruder ages of the world, when men
were busier in cultivating the earth than in cultivating arts and sciences, and
in seeking the necessaries of life than in the study of morality, they might
forget their Creator and Governor; and, therefore, God maintained amongst them
the great article of faith in him, by manifestations of himself; by sending
angels to declare his will; by miracles, and by prophecies.
"2. It was intended to give men the
profoundest veneration for that amazing knowledge from which nothing was
concealed, not even the future actions of creatures, and the things which as
yet were not. How could a man hope to hide any counsel, any design or thought,
from such a Being?
"3. It contributed to keep up devotion and
true religion, the religion of the heart, which consists partly in entertaining
just and honourable notions of God, and of his perfections, and which is a more
rational and a more acceptable service than rites and ceremonies.
"4. It excited men to rely upon God, and to
love him who condescended to hold this mutual intercourse with his creatures,
and to permit them to consult him, as one friend asks advice of another.
"5. It was intended to keep the people, to
whom God revealed himself, from idolatry; a sin to which the Jews would be
inclined, both from the disposition to it which they had acquired in Egypt, and
from the contagion of bad example.
The people of Israel were strictly forbidden to
consult the diviners and the gods of other nations, and to use any enchantments
and wicked arts; and that they might have no temptation to it. God permitted
them to apply to him and to his prophets, even upon small occasions; and, he
raised up amongst them a succession of prophets, to whom they might have
recourse for advice and direction. These prophets were reverenced abroad as
well as at home, and consulted by foreign princes; and, in times of the
captivity, they were honoured by great kings, and advanced to high
stations."
As it respects us, prophecy connected with
miracles affords a considerable evidence of the truth of revelation, as well as
of a superintending Providence. This evidence too, is a growing evidence.
"The divine design, uniformly pursued through a series of successive
generations, opens with a greater degree of clearness, in proportion to the
lapse of time and the number of events. An increase of age is an addition to
its strength; and the nearer we approach the point towards which the dispensations
of God unvaryingly tend, the more clearly shall we discern the wonderful
regularity, consistency, and beauty of this stupendous plan for universal good.
Of the great use of prophecies which have been fulfilled, as a direct and
strong argument to convert unbelievers to Christianity, and to establish
Christians in the faith, we have the most ample proofs. Our Lord himself made
very frequent appeals to prophecy as evidence of his divine mission: he
referred the Jews to their own Scriptures, as most fully and clearly bearing
witness of himself. Upon them he grounded the necessity of his sufferings; upon
them he settled the faith of the disciples at Emmaus, and of the apostles at
Jerusalem. The same source supplied the eloquence of St. Peter and St. Paul,
and the means with which Apollos 'mightily convinced the Jews.' This was a
powerful instrument of persuasion in the succeeding ages of the church, when
used by the primitive apologists. Upon this topic were employed the zeal and
diligence not only of Justin Martyr, but Tertullian, Cyprian, and Augustin. It
would never have been so frequently employed, if it had not been well adapted
to the desired end; and that it did most completely answer this end, by the
conversion of unbelievers, is evident from the accounts of Scripture, and the
records of the primitive church.
"Prophecy keeps the attention of Christians
alive to the truth and importance of their holy religion: to its truth, because
prophecy and Christianity had one and the same origin, both being derived from
the same fountain of perfection; it keeps them alive to its importance, because
prophecy shows that the Supreme Being has vouchsafed, through a long succession
of ages, to prepare mankind, by gradual revelations of his will, for future blessings;
and has proved, by sending chosen messengers to usher in this final
dispensation, that 'the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.' It
confirms the general belief of a God, and points out to a careless world the
plain traces of his watchful providence. It displays the counsels of
inspiration, incessantly directing the course of events, without violating the
order of reason and of human action. Such knowledge is too wonderful for us!
such power is above our comprehension! But the fact is placed before our eyes.
We see, or may see, a regular train of prophecies tending towards one declared
end, accurately fulfilled and fulfilling amidst all the confusion and
opposition of this tumultuous world; and we see that these prophecies are
clear, both in prediction and accomplishment, in proportion to their importance
in fixing our belief in the providence of God, and in the great truths of
divine revelation. Thus it appears that the chief design of prophecy is to bear
constant witness to religious truth; but though to convince gainsayers of this
truth is justly considered as its principal use, it has another very important
object, to which it well becomes us to pay attention, from motives of
gratitude, as well as from fear of incurring the blame which Scripture
invariably imputes to those who neglect to take advantage of the light afforded
them. It is designed to protect believers in the word of God from the dangers
arising from the prevalent corruptions, errors, and vices of the age in which
they live. The due consideration of prophecy will administer consolation amidst
present distress, and enliven faith and elevate hope, whilst passing through
those dark depressing scenes, which, without this gracious aid, might lead
through the intricacies of doubt to the gloom of despair."
Objections, however, have been raised against the
prophecies from their obscurity. But to this it is answered, that they have
often a first, or partial, and an ultimate completion, of which the former may
be generally considered as an earnest of the latter. It is principally this
double sense of prophecy which renders it obscure; for though the predictions
of the prophets were sometimes positive and exactly descriptive, and delivered
with an accurate and definite designation of names and times, prophecy was not
generally designed to be clear before its accomplishment. It is, however,
always sufficiently exact in its descriptions to authenticate its pretensions
to a divine authority; to produce, when it comes to pass, an acknowledgment of
its unerring certainty; and to demonstrate the wisdom and power of God. As
Bishop Newton observes, prophecies are the only species of writing which are
designed more for the instruction of future ages than of the times wherein they
are written. In this respect, as the world groweth older, it groweth wiser.
Time, that detracts something from the evidence of other writers, is still
adding something to the credit and authority of the prophets. Future ages will
comprehend more than the present, as the present understands more than the
past; and the perfect accomplishment will produce a perfect knowledge of all
the prophecies.
3. Of the fulfilment of prophecy. Our limits will
not permit us to give a copious account of the various prophecies which have
been remarkably fulfilled; but whoever has examined profane history with any
degree of attention, and compared it with the predictions of Scripture, must,
if he be not blinded by prejudice, and hardened by infidelity, be convinced of
the truth of prophecy by its exact accomplishment. It is in vain to say that
these prophecies were delivered since the events have taken place; for we see
the prophecies, the latest whereof were delivered about 1700 years ago, and
some of them above 3000 years ago, fulfilling at this very time; and cities,
and countries, and kingdoms, in the very same condition, and all brought about
in the very same manner, and with the very same circumstances, as the prophets
had foretold. "We see," says Bishop Newton, "the descendants of
Shem and Japheth, ruling and enlarged in Asia and Europe, and perhaps in
America, and 'the curse of servitude,' still attending the wretched descendants
of Ham in Africa. We see the posterity of Ishmael, 'multiplied exceedingly,'
and become 'a great nation,' in the Arabians; yet living like 'wild men,' and
shifting from place to place in the wilderness; 'their hand against every man,
and every man's hand against them;' and still dwelling an independent and free
people, 'in the presence of all their brethren,' and in the presence of all
their enemies. We see the family of Esau totally extinct, and that of Jacob
subsisting at this day; 'the septre departed from Judah,' and the people living
no where in authority, every where in subjection; the Jews still dwelling alone
among the nations, while 'the remembrance of Amalek is utterly put out from
under heaven.' We see the Jews severely punished for their infidelity and
disobedience to their great prophet like unto Moses: 'plucked from off their
own land, and removed into all the kingdoms of the earth; oppressed and spoiled
evermore;' and made 'a proverb and a by-word among all nations.' We see
'Ephraim so broken as to be no more a people,' while the whole nation is
comprehended under the name of Judah; the Jews wonderfully preserved as a
distinct people, while their great conquerors are everywhere destroyed; their
land lying desolate, and themselves cut off from being the people of God, while
the Gentiles are advanced in their room. We see Nineveh so completely destroyed,
that the place thereof is not and cannot be known; Babylon made 'a desolation
for ever, a possession for the bittern, and pools of water;' Tyre become 'like
the top of a rock, a place for fishers to spread their nets upon;' and Egypt,
'a base kingdom, the basest of the kingdoms,' and still tributary and subject
to strangers. We see, of the four great empires of the world, the fourth and
last, which was greater and more powerful than any of the former, divided in
the western part thereof into ten lesser kingdoms; and among them a power 'with
a triple crown differs from the first,' with 'a mouth speaking very great
things,' and with 'a look more stout than his fellows, speaking great words
against the Most High, wearing out the saints of the Most High, wearing out the
saints of the Most High, and changing times and laws.' We see a power 'cast
down the truth to the ground, and prosper, and practise, and destroy the holy
people, not regarding the God of his fathers, nor the desire of wives, but
honouring Mahuzzim,' gods-protectors, or saints-protectors, 'and causing' the
priests of Mahuzzim 'to rule over many, and to divide the land for gain.' We
see the Turks 'stretching forth their hand over the countries,' and
particularly 'over the land of Egypt, the Lybians at their steps,' and the
Arabians still 'escaping out of their hand.' We see the Jews 'led away captive
into all nations, and Jerusalem trodden down of the Gentiles,' and likely to
continue so 'until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled,' as the Jews are by
a constant miracle preserved a distinct people for the completion of other
prophecies relating to them. We see one 'who opposeth and exalteth himself'
above all laws, divine and human, 'sitting as God in the church of God, whose
coming is after the working of Satan, with all power, and signs, and lying
wonders, and with all deceivableness of unrighteousness.' We see a great
apostacy in the Christian church, which consists chiefly in the worship of
demons, angels, or departed saints, and is promoted 'through the hypocrisy of
liars, forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats. We see the
seven churches of Asia lying in the same forlorn and desolate condition that
the angel had signified to St. John, their 'candlestick returned into mosques,
their worship into superstition. In short, we see the characters of 'the beast
and the false prophet,' and 'the whore of Babylon,' now exemplified in every
particular, and in a city that is seated 'upon sever mountains;' so that, if
the bishop of Rome had set for his picture, a greater resemblance and likeness
could not have been drawn.
"for these things we have the attestation of
past, and the experience of present times; and we cannot well be deceived, if
we will only believe our own eyes and observation. We actually see the
completion of many of the prophecies in the state of men and things around us;
and we have the prophecies themselves recorded in books, which books have been
read in public assemblies these 1700 or 2000 years, have been dispersed into
several countries, have been translated into several languages, and quoted and
commented upon by different nations, so that there is no room to suspect so
much as a possibility of forgery or illusion."
4. Rules for understanding the prophecies.
In order to understand the prophecies, and to
form a right judgment of the argument for the truth of Christianity, we must
not consider them singly and apart, but as a grand whole, or a chain reaching
through several thousand years, yet manifestly subservient to one and the same
end. This end is no other than the establishment of the universal empire of
truth and righteousness under the dominion of Jesus Christ. We are not, indeed,
to suppose that each of the prophecies recorded in the Old Testament expressly
points out, and clearly characterized Jesus Christ; yet, taken as a whole this
grand system refers to him; for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of
prophecy. "All the revolutions of divine providence have him for their
scope and end. Is an empire, or kingdom erected? that empire, or kingdom is
erected with a view, directly or indirectly, to the kingdom of the Messiah. Is
an empire, or kingdom, subverted or overthrown? that empire, or kingdom, is
overthrown in subserviency to the glory of his kingdom and empire, which shall
know neither bounds nor end, but whose limits shall be no other than the days
of eternity. Jesus Christ, then, is the only person that ever existed in whom
all the prophecies meet as in a centre." In order, therefore, to oppose
error and confront the infidel, we must study the prophecies not as independent
of each other, but as connected; for " the argument from prophecy,"
says Bishop Hurd, "is not to be formed from the consideration of single
prophecies, but from all the prophecies taken together, and considered as
making one system; in which, from the mutual dependence and connection of its
parts, preceding prophecies prepare and illustrate those which follow; and
these, again, reflect light on the foregoing: just as in any philosophical
system, that which shows the solidity of it is the harmony and correspondence
of the whole, not the application of it in particular instances.
"Hence, though the evidence be but small
from the completion of any one prophecy taken separately, yet that evidence,
being always something, the amount of the whole evidence resulting from a great
number of prophecies, all relative to the same design, may be considerable;
like many scattered rays, which, though each be weak in itself, yet, concentrated
into one point, shall form a strong light, and strike the sense very
powerfully. Still more; this evidence is not merely a growing evidence, but is
indeed multiplied upon us, from the number of reflected lights which the
several component parts of such a system reciprocally throw upon each; till, at
length, the conviction rises unto a high degree of moral certainty."
Farther, in order to understand the prophecies,
we must endeavour to find out the true subject of prophecy; that is, precisely
what the prophets speak of, and the characters that are applied to that
subject. The literal sense should be always kept in view, and a knowledge of
oriental customs attended. The beginning and end of the prophetic sermons must
be carefully observed. The time, as near as possible, of the prediction, should
be ascertained. An acquaintance with the method of salvation by Christ will
greatly assist us in this work. The mind must be unprejudiced, and we should be
well acquainted with the Scriptures at large. These rules, with dependence on
the divine teaching, will assist us in understanding the prophecies. See Bishop
Newton's Dissertations on the Prophecies; Bishop Sherlock's Use and Intent of
Prophecy; Bishop Hurd's Sermons on the Prophecies; Sir Isaac Newton's Observations
on the Prophecies of Daniel and the Apocalypse; Gray's Key to the Old
Testament; Simpson's Key to the Prophecies; Illustrations of Prophecy;
Vitringa's Typhus Doctrine Propheticae; Gill on the Prophets; Etrick's second
Exodus, or Remarks on the Prophecies of the Last Times; Kett's History the
Interpreter of Prophecy. See also the works of Mede, Smith, Halifax, Apthorp,
and Faber, on the subject.
Religious exercises of the clergy in the reign of Queen Elizabeth, instituted for the purpose of promoting knowledge and piety. The ministers of a particular division at a set time met together in some church of a market or other large town, and there each in their order explained, according to their abilities, some portion of Scripture allotted to them before. This done, a moderator made his observations on what had been said, and determined the true sense of the place, a certain space of time being fixed for dispatching the whole. These institutions, like all others, however, it seems, were abused, by irregularity, disputations, and divisions. Archbishop Grindal endeavoured to regulate the prophesyings, and cover them from the objections that the court made against them, by enjoining the ministers to observe decency and order, by forbidding them to meddle with politics and church government, and by prohibiting all non-conformist ministers and laymen from being speakers. The queen, however, was resolved to suppress them; and having sent for the archbishop, told him she was informed that the rites and ceremonies of the church were not duly observed in these prophesyings; that persons not lawfully called to be ministers exercised in them; that the assemblies themselves were illegal, not being allowed by public authority; that the laity neglected their secular affairs by reparing to these meetings which filled their heads with notions, and might occasion disputes and sedition in the state; that it was good for the church to have but few preachers, three or four in a county being sufficient. She further declared her dislike of the number of these exercises, and therefore commanded him peremptorily to put them down. The archbishop, however, instead of obeying the commands of his royal mistress, thought that she had made some infringement upon his office, and wrote the queen a long and earnest letter, declaring that his conscience would not suffer him to comply with her commands. The queen was so inflamed with this letter, that the archbishop was sequestered from his office, and he never afterwards recovered the queen's favour. Thus ended the prophesyings; "a useful institution," says Neale, "for promoting Christian knowledge and piety, at a time when both were at a very low ebb in the nation. The queen put them down for no other reason, but because they enlightened the people's minds in the Scriptures, and encouraged their inquiries after truth; her majesty being always of opinion that knowledge and learning in the laity would only endanger their peaceable submission to her absolute will and pleasure."
A person who foretells future events. It is
particularly applied to such inspired persons among the Jews as were
commissioned by God to declare his will and purposes to that people. See
PROPHECY.
False Prophets. See IMPOSTORS; and Josephus's
Hist. of the Jews.
Some of the Prophets, an appellation given to
young men who were educated in the schools or colleges under a proper master,
who was commonly, if not always, an inspired prophet in the knowledge of
religion, and in sacred music, and thus were qualified to be public preachers,
1 Sam. x. 1 Sam. xi. 2 Sam. xix. 2 Kings, ii.
A sacrifice offered to God to assuage his wrath,
and render him propitious. Among the Jews, there were both ordinary and public
sacrifices, as holocausts, &c. offered by way of thanksgiving; and
extraordinary ones, offered by persons guilty of any crime, by way of
propitiation. The Romish church believe the mass to be a sacrifice of
propitiation for the living and the dead. The reformed churches allow of no
propitiation, but that one offered by Jesus on the cross, whereby divine
justice is appeased, and our sins forgiven, Rom. iii. 25. 1 John ii. 2.
As it respects the unbloody propitiatory
sacrifice of the mass above-mentioned, little need be said to confute such a
doctrine. Indeed, it is owned in the church of Rome, that there is no other
foundation for the belief of it than an unwritten tradition. There is no hint
in the Scripture of Christ's offering his body and blood to his Father at his
institution of the eucharist. It is also a manifest contradiction to St. Paul's
doctrine, who teaches, that, without shedding of blood, there is no remission;
therefore there can be no remission of sins in the mass. The sacrifice of
Christ, according to the same apostle, is not to be repeated. A second oblation
would be superfluous; consequently the pretended true and proper sacrifice of
the mass must be superfluous and useless.
That propitiation made by Jesus Christ is that
which atones for and covers our guilt, as the mercy-seat did the tables of the
law; or it may be defined thus: "It is the averting the punishment due to
any one, by undergoing the penalty in the room of the guilty." Thus Jesus
Christ is called the propitiation or atonement, as his complete righteousness
appeases his Father, and satisfies his law and justice for all our
transgressions. See ATONEMENT, and books under that article.
See ANALOGY OF FAITH.
A new convert to some religion or religious sect. Among the Hebrews, proselytes were distinguished into two sorts: the first called proselytes of the gate, because suffered to live among them, and were those who observed the moral law only, and the rules imposed on the children of Noah; the second were called proselytes of justice, who engaged to receive circumcision, and the whole law of Moses, and enjoyed all the privileges of a native Hebrew.
Signifies prayer; but it is taken for the places of prayer of the Jews, and was pretty near the same as their synagogues. But the synagogues were originally in the cities, and were covered places; whereas, for the most part, the proseuches, were out of the cities, and on the banks of rivers, having no covering, except, perhaps, the shade of some trees or covered galeries, Acts xvi. 13.
A state wherein things succeed, according to our
wishes, and are productive of affluence and ease. However desirable prosperity
be, it has its manifest disadvantages. It too often alienates the soul from
God; excites pride; exposes to temptation; hardens the heart; occasions
idleness; promotes effeminacy; damps zeal and energy; and, too often has a
baneful relative influence. It is no wonder, therefore, that the Almighty in
general withholds it from his children; and that adversity should be their lot
rather than prosperity. Indeed adversity seems more beneficial on the whole,
although it be so unpleasant to our feelings. "The advantages of
prosperity," says Bacon, "are to be wished; but the advantages of
adversity are to be admired. The principal virtue of prosperity, is temperance;
the principal virtue of adversity, is fortitude, which in morality is allowed
to be the most heroical virtue; prosperity best discovers vice, adversity best
discovers virtue, which is like those perfumes that are most fragrant when
burnt or bruised." It is not, however, to be understood, that prosperity
in itself is unlawful. The world with all its various productions was formed by
the Almighty for the happiness of man, and designed to endear himself to us,
and to lead our minds up to him. What however God often gives us as a blessing,
by our own folly we pervert and turn into a curse. Where prosperity is given,
there religion is absolutely necessary to enable us to act under it as we
ought. Where this divine principle influences the mind, prosperity may be
enjoyed and become a blessing; for "While bad men snatch the pleasures of
the world, as by stealth, without countenance from God, the proprietor of the
world; the righteous sit openly down to the feast of life, under the smile of
heaven. No guilty fears damp their joys. The blessing of God, rests upon all
they possess. Their piety reflects sunshine from heaven upon the prosperity of
the world; unites in one point of view the smiling aspect, both of the powers
above, and of the objects below. Not only have they as full a relish as others
of the innocent pleasures of life, but moreover, in them they hold communion
with God. In all that is good or fair, they trace his hand. From the beauties
of nature, from the improvements of art, from the enjoyments of social life,
they raise their affections to the source of all the happiness which surrounds
them, and thus widen the sphere of their pleasures, by adding intellectual and
spiritual to earthly joys. Blair's Sermons, vol. i. ser. 3. Bates's Works, p.
297.
Spiritual prosperity consists in the continual
progress of the mind in knowledge, purity, and joy. It arises from the
participation of the divine blessing; and evidences itself by frequency in
prayer; love to God's word; delight in his people; attendance on his
ordinances; zeal in his cause; submission to his will; usefulness in his
church; and increasing abhorrence of every thing that is derogatory to his
glory.
A name first given in Germany to those who adhered to the doctrine of Luther, because in 1529, they protested against a decree of the emperor Charles V. and the diet of Spires; declaring that they appealed to a general council. The same has also been given to those of the sentiments of Calvin; and is now become a common denomination for all those of the reformed churches. See article REFORMATION; Fell's Four Letters on genuine Protestantism; Chillingworth's Religion of the Protestants; Robertson's Hist. of Charles V. vol. ii. p. 249, 250.
The superintendence and care which God exercises
over creation. The arguments for the providence of God are generally drawn from
the light of nature; the being of a God; the creation of the world; the
wonderfully disposing and controlling the affairs and actions of men; from the
absolute necessity of it; from the various blessings enjoyed by his creatures;
the awful judgments that have been inflicted; and from the astonishing
preservation of the Bible and the church through every age, notwithstanding the
attempts of earth and hell against them. Providence has been divided into
immediate and mediate, ordinary and extraordinary, common and special,
universal and particular. Immediate providence is what is exercised by God
himself, without the use of any instrument or second cause; mediate providence
is what is exercised in the use of means; ordinary providence is what is
exercised in the common course of means, and by the chain of second causes;
extraordinary is what is out of the common way, as miraculous operations;
common providence is what belongs to the whole world; special, what relates to
the church; universal relates to the general upholding and preserving all
things; particular relates to individuals in every action and circumstance.
This last, however, is denied by some. But, as a good writer observes,
"The opinion entertained by some that the providence of God extends no
farther than to a general superintendence of the laws of nature, without
interposing in the particular concerns of individuals, is contrary both to
reason and to Scripture. It renders the government of the Almighty altogether
loose and contingent, and would leave no ground for reposing any trust under its
protection; for the majority of human affairs would then be allowed to
fluctuate in a fortuitous course, without moving in any regular direction, and
without tending to any one scope. The uniform doctrine of the sacred writings
is, that throughout the universe nothing happens without God; that his hand is
ever active, and his decree or permission intervenes in all; that nothing is
too great or unwieldy for his management, and nothing so minute and
inconsiderable as to be below his inspection and care. While he is guiding the
sun and moon in their course through the heavens; while in this inferior world
he is ruling among empires, stilling the ragings of the waters, and the tumults
of the people, he is at the same time watching over the humble good man, who,
in the obscurity of his cottage, is serving and worshipping him."
"In what manner, indeed, Providence
interposes in human affairs; by what means it influences the thoughts and
counsels of men, and, notwithstanding the influence it exerts, leaves to them
the freedom of choice, are subjects of dark and mysterious nature, and which
have given occasion to many an intricate controversy. Let us remember, that the
manner in which God influences the motion of all the heavenly bodies, the
nature of that secret power by which he is ever directing the sun and the moon,
the planets, stars, and comets, in their course through the heavens, while they
appear to move themselves in a free course, are matters no less inexplicable to
us than the manner in which he influences the councils of men. But though the
mode of divine operation remains unknown, the fact of an over-ruling influence
is equally certain in the moral as it is in the natural world. In cases where
the fact is clearly authenticated, we are not at liberty to call its truth in
question, merely because we understand not the manner in which it is brought
about. Nothing can be more clear, from the testimony of Scripture, than that
God takes part in all that happens among mankind; directing and over-ruling the
whole course of events so as to make every one of them answer the designs of
his wise and righteous government. We cannot, indeed, conceive God acting as
the governor of the world at all, unless his government were to extend to all
the events that happen. It is upon the supposition of a particular providence
that our worship and prayers to him are founded. All his perfections would be
utterly insignificant to us, if they were not exercised, on every occasion,
according as the circumstances of his creatures required. The Almighty would
then be no more than an unconcerned spectator of the behaviour of his subjects,
regarding the obedient and the rebellious with an equal eye.
"The experience of every one also, must,
more or less, bear testimony to it. We need not for this purpose have recourse
to those sudden and unexpected vicissitudes which have sometimes astonished
whole nations, and drawn their attention to the conspicuous hand of heaven. We
need not appeal to the history of the statesman and the warrior; of the
ambitious and the enterprising. We confine our observation to those whose lives
have been most plain and simple, and who had no desire to depart from the
ordinary train of conduct. In how many instances have we found, that we are
held in subjection to a higher Power, on whom depends the accomplishment of our
wishes and designs? Fondly we had projected some favourite plan: we thought
that we had forecast and provided for all that might happen; we had taken our
measures with such vigilant prudence, that on every side we seemed to ourselves
perfectly guarded and secure; but, lo! some little event hath come about,
unforeseen by us, and in its consequences at the first seemingly
inconsiderable, which yet hath turned the whole course of things into a new
direction, and blasted all our hopes. At other times our counsels and plans
have been permitted to succeed: we then applauded our own wisdom, and sat down
to feast on the happiness we had attained. To our surprise we found that
happiness was not there, and that God's decree had appointed it to be only
vanity. We labour for prosperity, and obtain it not. Unexpected, it is
sometimes made to drop upon us as of its own accord. The happiness of man
depends on secret springs too nice and delicate to be adjusted by human art: it
required a favourable combination of external circumstances with the state of
his own mind. To accomplish on every occasion such a combination, is far beyond
his power: but it is what God can at all times effect; as the whole series of external
causes are arranged according to his pleasure, and the hearts of all men are in
his hands, to turn them wheresoever he will, as rivers of water. From the
imperfection of our knowledge to ascertain what is good for us, and from the
defect of our power to bring about that good when known, arise all those
disappointments which continually testify that the way of man is not in
himself; that he is not the master of his own lot; that, though he may devise,
it is God who directs; God, who can make the smallest incident an effectual
instrument of his providence for overturning the most laboured plans of men.
"Accident, and chance, and fortune, are
words which we often hear mentioned, and much is ascribed to them in the life
of man. But they are words without meaning; or, as far as they have any
signification, they are no other than names for the unknown operations of
Providence; for it is certain that in God's universe nothing comes to pass
causelessly, or in vain. Every event has its own determined direction. That
chaos of human affairs and intrigues where we can see no light, that mass of
disorder and confusion which they often present to our view, is all clearness
and order in the sight of Him who is governing and directing all, and bringing
forward every event in its due time and place. The Lord sitteth on the flood.
The Lord maketh the wrath of man to praise him, as he maketh the hail and the
rain obey his word. He hath prepared his throne in the heavens; and his kingdom
ruleth over all. A man's heart deviseth his way, but the Lord directeth his
steps."
"To follow the leadings of providence, means
no other than to act agreeably to the law of duty, prudence, and safety, or any
particular circumstance, according to the direction or determination of the
word or law of God. He follows the dictates of Providence, who takes a due
survey of the situation he is placed in, compares it with the rules of the word
which reaches his case, and acts accordingly. To know the will of God as it
respects providence, there must be, 1. Deliberation.--2. Consultation.--3.
Supplication. The tokens of the divine will and pleasure in any particular case
are not to be gathered from our inclinations, particular frames, the form of
Scripture phrases, impulses, nor even the event, as that cannot always be a
rule of judgment; but whatever appears to be proper duty, true prudence, or
real necessity, that we should esteem to be his will." See Charnock,
Flavel, Hoakwell, Hopkins, Sherlock, Collings, and Fawcet on Providence; Gill's
Body of Divinity; Ridgley's Body of Divinity, qu. 18; Blair's Ser. ser. 18,
vol. v.; Forsythe's Piece on Providence, Enc. Brit.; Wollaston's Religion of
Nature delineated, sec. 5; Thomson's Seasons, Winter, conclusion.
Is the act of suiting words and actions
according to the circumstance of things, or rules of right reason: Cicero thus
defines it: "Estrerum expetendarum fugiendarum scientia."--"The
knowledge of what is to be desired or avoided." Grove thus: "Prudence
is an ability of judging what is best in the choice both of ends and
means." Mason thus: "Prudence is a conformity to the rules of reason,
truth, and decency, at all times, and in all circumstances. It differs from
wisdom only in degree; wisdom being nothing but a more consummate habit of
prudence; and prudence a lower degree or weaker habit of wisdom." It is
divided into, 1. Christian prudence, which directs to the pursuit of that
blessedness which the Gospel discovers by the use of Gospel means.--2. Moral
prudence has for its end peace and satisfaction of mind in this world, and the
greatest happiness after death.--3. Civil prudence is the knowledge of what
ought to be done in order to secure the outward happiness of life, consisting in
prosperity, liberty, &c.--4. Monastic, relating to any circumstances in
which a man is not charged with the care of others.--5. OEconomical prudence
regards the conduct of a family.--6. Political refers to the good government of
a state.
The idea of prudence, says one, includes due
consultation: that is, concerning such things as demand consultation in a right
manner, and for a competent time, that the resolution taken up may be neither
too precipitate nor too slow; and a faculty of discerning proper means when
they occur. To the perfection of prudence these three things are farther
required, viz. a natural sagacity, presence of mind, or a ready turn of
thought; and experience.
Plato styles prudence the leading virtue; and
Cicero observes, "that not one of the virtues can want prudence,"
which is certainly most true, since without prudence to guide them, piety would
degenerate into superstition, zeal into bigotry, temperance into austerity,
courage into rashness, and justice itself into folly. See Watts's Ser. ser. 28;
Grove's Moral Phil. vol. ii. ch. 2; Mason's Christian Mor. vol. i. ser. 4;
Evans's Christ. Temper, ser. 38.
The art or act of singing psalms. Psalmody was
always esteemed a considerable part of devotion, and usually performed in the
standing posture; and as to the manner of pronunciation, the plain song was
sometimes used, being a gentle inflection of the voice, not much different from
reading, like the chant in cathedrals; at other times more artificial
composition were used, like our anthems.
As to the persons concerned in singing, sometimes
a single person sung alone; sometimes the whole assembly joined together, which
was the most ancient and general practice. At other times, the psalms were sung
alternately, the congregation dividing themselves into two parts, and singing
verse about, in their turns. There was also a fourth way of singing, pretty
common in the fourth century, which was, when a single person began the verse,
and the people joined with him in the close: this was often used for variety in
the same service with alternate psalmody. See SINGING.
A sect of Arians who in the council of Antioch, held in the year 360, maintained that the Son was not like the Father as to will; that he was taken from nothing, or made of nothing; and that in God generation was not to be distinguished from creation.
Is a place in which the just who depart out of this life are supposed to expiate certain offences which do not merit eternal damnation. Broughton has endeavoured to prove that this notion has been held by Pagans, Jews, and Mahometans, as well as by Christians; and that, in the days of the Maccabees, the Jews believed that sin might be expiated by sacrifice after the death of the sinner. The arguments advanced by the Papists for purgatory are these: 1. Every sin, how slight soever, though no more than an idle word, as it is an offence to God, deserves punishment from him, and will be punished by him hereafter, if not cancelled by repentance here.--2. Such small sins do not deserve eternal punishment.--3. Few depart this life so pure as to be totally exempt from spots of this nature, and from every kind of debt due to God's justice.--4. Therefore few will escape without suffering something from his justice for such debts as they have carried with them out of this world, according to that rule of divine justice by which he treats every soul hereafter according to its own works, and according to the state in which he finds it in death. From these propositions, which the Papist considers as so many self-evident truths, he infers that there must be some third place of punishment; for since the infinite goodness of God can admit nothing into heaven which is not clean and pure from all sin both great and small, and his infinite justice can permit none to receive the reward of bliss who as yet are not out of debt, but have something in justice to suffer, there must of necessity, be some place or state, where souls departing this life, pardoned as to the external guilt or pain, yet obnoxious to some temporal penalty, or with the guilt of some venial faults, are purged and purified before their admittance into heaven. And this is what he is taught concerning purgatory, which, though he know not where it is, of what nature the pains are, or how long each soul is detained there, yet he believes that those who are in this place are relieved by the prayers of their fellow-members here on earth, as also by alms and masses offered up to God for their souls. And as for such as have no relations or friends to pray for them, or give alms or procure masses for their relief, they are not neglected by the memoration of all the faithful departed in every mass, and in every one of the canonical hours of the divine office. Besides the above arguments, the following passages are alleged as proofs: 2 Maccabees, xii. 43, 44, 45. Matt. xii. 31, 32. 1 Cor. iii. 15. 1 Pet. iii. 19. But it may be observed, 1. That the books of Maccabees have no evidence of inspiration, therefore quotations from them are not to be regarded.--2. If they were, the texts referred to would rather prove that there is no such place as purgatory, since Judas did not expect the souls departed to reap any benefit from his sin-offering till the resurrection. The texts quoted from the Scriptures have no reference to this doctrine, as may be seen by consulting the context, and any just commentator thereon.--3. Scripture, in general, speaks of departed souls going immediately at death to a fixed state of happiness or misery, and gives us no idea of purgatory, Isa. lvii. 2. Rev. xiv. 13. Luke, xvi. 22. 2 Cor. v. 8.--4. It is derogatory from the doctrine of Christ's satisfaction. If Christ died for us, and redeemed us from sin and hell, as the Scripture speaks, then the idea of farther meritorious suffering detracts from the perfection of Christ's work, and places merit still in the creature; a doctrine exactly opposite to Scripture. See Doddridge's Lec. lec. 270; Limborch's Theol. l. 6, ch. 10 $ 10, 22; Earl's Sermon, in the Sermons against Popery, vol.ii. No. 1; Burnett on the Art 22; Fleury's Catechism, vol. ii. p. 250.
A ceremony which consists in cleansing any thing from pollution or defilement. Purifications are common to Jews, Pagans, and Mahometans. See IMPURITY.
A name given in the primitive church to the
Novatians, because they would never admit to communion any one, who from dread
of death, had apostatized from the faith; but the word has been chiefly applied
to those who were professed favourers of a farther degree of reformation and
purity in the church before the act of uniformity, in 1662. After this period,
the term Nonconformists became common, to which succeeds the appellation
Dissenter.
"During the reign of queen Elizabeth, in
which the royal prerogative was carried to its utmost limits, there were found
many daring spirits who questioned the right of the sovereign to prescribe and
dictate to her subjects what principles of religion they should profess, and
what forms they ought to adhere to. The ornaments and habits worn by the clergy
in the preceding reign, when the Romish religion and rites were triumphant,
Elizabeth was desirous of preserving in the Protestant service. This was the
cause of great discontent among a large body of her subjects; multitudes
refused to attend at those churches where the habits and ceremonies were used;
the conforming clergy they treated with contumely; and from the superior purity
and simplicity of the modes of worship to which they adhered, they obtained the
name of Puritans. The queen made many attempts to repress every thing that
appeared to her as an innovation in the religion established by her almost
unlimited authority she readily checked open and avowed opposition, but she
could not extinguish the principles of the Puritans, 'by whom alone,' according
to Mr. Hume, 'the precious spark of liberty had been kindled and was preserved,
and to whom the English owe the whole freedom of their constitution.' Some
secret attempts that had been made by them to establish a separate congregation
and discipline had been carefully repressed by the strict hand which Elizabeth
held over all her subjects. The most, therefore, that they could effect was, to
assemble in private houses, for the purpose of worshipping God according to the
dictates of their own consciences. These practices were at first connived at,
but afterwards every mean was taken to suppress them, and the most cruel
methods were made use of to discover persons who were disobedient to the royal
pleasure."
The severe persecutions carried on against the
Puritans during the reigns of Elizabeth and the Stuarts, served to lay the
foundation of a new empire in the western world. Thither as into a wilderness
they fled from the face of their persecutors, and, being protected in the free
exercise of their religion, continued to increase, till in about a century and
a half they became an independent nation. The different principles, however, on
which they had originally divided from the church establishment at home,
operated in a way that might have been expected when they came to the
possession of the civil power abroad. Those who formed the colony of
Massachusetts's Bay, having never relinquished the principles of a national
church, and of the power of the civil magistrate in matters of faith and
worship, were less tolerant than those who settled at New Plymouth, at Rhode
Island, and at Providence Plantations. The very men (and they were good men
too) who had just escaped the persecutions of the English prelates, now in
their turn persecuted others who dissented from them, till at length the
liberal system of toleration established in the parent country at the
revolution, extending to the colonies, in a good measure put an end to these
proceedings.
Neither the Puritans before the passing of the
Bartholomew act in 1662, nor the Nonconformists after it, appear to have
disapproved of the articles of the established church in matters of doctrine.
The number of them who did so, however, was very small. While the great body of
the bishops and clergy had from the days of archbishop Laud abandoned their own
articles in favour of Arminianism, they were attached to the principles of the
first reformers; and by their labours and sufferings the spirit of the
reformation was kept alive in the land. But after the revolution, one part of
the Protestant Dissenters, chiefly Presbyterians, first veered towards
Arminianism, then revived the Arian controversy, and by degrees many of them
settled in Socinianism. At the same time another part of them, chiefly
Independents and Baptists, earnestly contending for the doctrines of grace, and
conceiving as it would seem, that the danger of erring lay entirely on one
side, first veered towards high Calvinism, then forbore the unregenerate to repent,
believe, or do any thing practically good, and by degrees many of them, it is
said, settled in Antinomianism.
Such are the principles which have found place
amongst the descendants of the Puritans. At the same time, however, it must be
acknowledged that a goodly number of each of the three denominations have
adhered to the doctrine and spirit of their forefathers; and have proved the
efficacy of their principles by their concern to be holy in all manner of
conversation. See articles BROWNISTS, INDEPENDENTS, and NONCONFORMISTS, in this
work. See also list of books under the last-mentioned article.
The freedom of any thing from foreign admixture;
but more particularly it signifies the temper directly opposite to criminal
sensualities, or the ascendency of irregular passions. (See CHASTITY.)
Purity implies, 1. A fixed habitual abhorrence of
all forbidden indulgences of the flesh.--2. All past impurities, either of
heart or life, will be reflected on with shame and sorrow.--3. The heart will
be freed, in a great measure, from impure and irregular desires.--4. It will
discover itself by a cautious fear of the least degree of impurity.--5. It
implies a careful and habitual guard against every thing which tends to pollute
the mind. See Evan's Sermons on the Christian Temper, ser. 23; and Watts's
Sermons, ser. 27.
See DEGREE.
Is a feebleness of mind, by which it is terrified at more trifles or imaginary dangers, unauthorised by the most distant probability.
See SCEPTICS.