A denomination which arose in the year 1645. They set up the light of nature under the name of Christ in men. With regard to the church, Scripture, Ministry, &c. their sentiments were the same as the Seekers. See SEEKERS
Consists in undertaking an action, or pronouncing an opinion, without a due examination of the grounds, motives, or arguments, that ought first to be weighed.
See JUDGING RASH.
See SCRIPTURES.
A term made use of to denote those Trinitarians who are the most orthodox, in opposition to the Socinian and Sabellian schemes. It was also the name of a sect of school philosophers, formed in opposition to the Nominalists. The former believed that universals are realities, and have an actual existence out of the mind; while the latter contended that they exist only in the mind, and are only ideas.
A faculty or power of the mind, whereby it draws
just conclusions from the true and clear principles. Many attempts have been
made to prove reason inimical to revelation; but nothing can be more evident
than that it is of considerable use in knowing, distinguishing, proving, and
defending the mysteries of revelation; although it must not be considered as a
perfect standard by which all the mysteries of religion must be measured before
they are received by faith. "In things," says Dr. Watts, "which
are plainly and expressly asserted in Scripture, and that in a sense which
contradicts not other parts of Scripture, or natural light, our reason must
submit, and believe the thing, though it cannot find the modus or manner of its
being so in the doctrines of the Trinity and Incarnation, which are above the
reach of our reason in this present state. But we cannot, nor must we, be led
to take the words of Scripture in such a sense as expressly and evidently
contradicts all sense and reason, as transubstantiation: for the two great
lights of God, reason and revelation, never contradict each other, though one
be superior to the other.
"Therefore reason has a great deal to do in
religion, viz. to find out the rule (of faith,) to compare the parts of this
rule with one another, to explain the one by the other, to give the grammatical
and logical sense of the expressions, and to exclude self-contradictory
interpretations, as well as interpretations contrary to reason. But it is not
to set itself up as a judge of those truths expressed therein, which are
asserted by a superior and infallible dictator, God himself; but reason
requires and commands even the subjection of all its own powers to a truth thus
divinely attested; for it is as possible and as proper that God should propose
doctrines to our understanding which it cannot comprehend, as duties to our
practice which we cannot see the reason of; for he is equally superior to our
understanding and will, and he puts the obedience of both to a trial." See
RELIGION and REVELATION, and books there recommended; also Porteus's Sermons,
ser. 5. vol. 1.; Jenyns's Internal Evidence, p. 122; Ryland's Contemplations,
vol. i. p. 83; Theological Miscellany, vol. ii. p. 533; An Essay on the Use and
Abuse of Reason in Matters of Religion, by Witsius, and translated by Carter;
Dr. Watts's Strength and Weakness of Human Reason.
Among the Papists, a person shut up in a small cell of an hermitage or monastery, and cut off not only from all conversation with the world, but even with the house. This is a kind of voluntary imprisonment from a motive either of devotion or penance.
The restoring to favour or friendship those who were at variance. It is more particularly used in reference to the doctrine of the atonement. Thus God is said to reconcile us to himself by Jesus Christ, 2 Cor. v. 18. Our state by nature is that of enmity, dissatisfaction, and disobedience. But by the sufferings and merit of Christ we are reconciled and brought near to God. the blessings of reconciliation are pardon, peace, friendship, confidence, holiness, and eternal life. The judicious Guyse gives us an admirable note on this doctrine, which I shall here transcribe. "When the Scripture speaks of reconciliation by Christ, or by his cross, blood, or death, it is commonly expressed by God's reconciling us to himself, and not by his being reconciled unto us; the reason of which seems to be, because God is the offended party, and we are the offenders, who, as such, have need to be reconciled to him: and the price of reconciliation, by the blood of Christ, is paid to him, and not to us. Gratius observes, that, in heathen authors, men's being reconciled to their gods is always understood to signify appeasing the anger of their gods. Condemned rebels may be said to be reconciled to their sovereign, when he, on one consideration or another, pardons them; though, perhaps, they still remain rebels in their hearts against him. And when our Lord ordered the offending to go and be reconciled to his offended brother, Matt. v. 23, 24, the plain meaning is, that he should go and try to appease his anger, obtain his forgiveness, and regain his favour and friendship, by humbling himself to him, asking his pardon, or satisfying him for any injury that he might have done him. In like manner, God's reconciling us to himself by the cross of Christ does not signify, as the Socinians contend, our being reconciled by conversion to a religious turn in our hearts to God, but is a reconciliation that results from God's graciously providing and accepting an atonement for us, that he might not inflict the punishment upon us which we deserved, and the law condemned us to; but might be at peace with us, and receive us into favour on Christ's account. For this reconciliation, by the cross of Christ is in a way of atonement or satisfaction to divine justice for sin; and with respect hereunto, we are said to be reconciled to God by the death of his Son while we are enemies, which is of much the same import with Christ's dying for the ungodly, and while we were yet sinners, Rom. v. 6, 8, 10. And our being reconciled to God, by approving and accepting of his method of reconciliation by Jesus Christ, and, on that encouragement, turning to him, is distinguished from his reconciling us to himself, and not imputing our trespasses to us, on account of Christ's having been made sin for us, that we might be made the righteousness of God in him, 2 Cor. v. 18, 21. This is called Christ's making reconciliation for iniquity, and making reconciliation for the sins of the people, Dan. ix. 24. Heb. ii. 17, and answers to the ceremonial and typical reconciliation which was made by the blood of the sacrifices under the law to make atonement and reconciliation for Israel, 2 Chron. xxix. 24. Ezek. xiv. 15, 17, and which was frequently styled making atonement for sin, and an atonement for their souls. Now as all the legal sacrifices of atonement, and the truly expiatory sacrifices of Christ, were offered not to the offenders, but to God, to reconcile him in them, what can reconciliation by the death, blood, or cross of Christ mean, but that the law and justice of God were thereby satisfied, and all obstructions, on his part, to peace and friendship toward sinners are removed, that he might not pursue his righteous demands upon them, according to the holy resentments of his nature and will, and the threatenings of his law for their sins; but might mercifully forgive them, and take them into a state of favour with himself, upon their receiving the atonement, or reconciliation (Rom. v. 11,) by faith, after the offence that sin had given him, and the breach it had made upon the original friendship between him and them?" See articles ATONEMENT, MEDIATOR, and PROPITIATION; Grot. de Satisf. cap. 7; Dr. Owen's Answer to Biddle's Catechism; Guyse's Note on Coloss. i. 21; Charnock's Works, vol. ii. p. 241; John Reynolds on Reconciliation.
or UPRIGHTNESS, is the choosing and pursuing those things which the mind, upon due inquiry and attention, clearly perceives to be good, and avoiding those that are evil.
A term applied to several persons whose offices are very different, as, 1. The rector of a parish is a clergyman that has the charge and care of a parish, and possesses all the tithes, &c.--2. The same name is also given to the chief elective officer in several foreign universities, and also to the head master of large schools.--3. Rector is also used in several convents, for the superior officer who governs the house. the Jesuits gave this name to the superiors of such of their houses as were either seminaries or colleges.
Such persons as acknowledge the pope to be the supreme head of the church, and refuse to acknowledge the king's supremacy; who are hence called popish recusants.
In theology, denotes our recovery from sin and death by the obedience and sacrifice of Christ, who, on this account, is called The Redeemer, Isaiah lix. 20. Job xix. 25. Our English word redemption says Dr. Gill, is from the Latin tongue, and signifies buying again; and several words in the Greek language of the New Testament, are used in the affair of our redemption, which signify the obtaining of something by paying a proper price for it: sometimes the simple verb, to buy, is used: so the redeemed are said to be bought unto God by the blood of Christ, and to be bought from the earth, and to be bought from among men, and to be bought with a price; that is, with the price of Christ's blood. 1 Cor. vi. 20. Hence the church of God is said to be purchased with it, Acts xx. 28. Sometimes the compound word is used; which signifies to buy again, or out of the hands of another, as the redeemed are bought out of the hands of justice, as in Gal. iii. 13. and Gal. iv. 5. In other places, another word is used or others derived from it, which signifies the deliverance of a slave or captive from thraldom, by paying a ransom price for him: so the saints are said to be redeemed not with silver or gold, the usual price paid for a ransom, but with a far greater one, the blood and life of Christ, which he came into this world to give as a ransom price for many, and even himself, which is an answerable, adequate, and full price for them, 1 Pet. i. 18. The evils from which we are redeemed or delivered are the curse of the law, sin, Satan, the world, death, and hell. The moving cause of redemption is the love of God, John iii. 16. The procuring cause, Jesus Christ, 1 Pet. i. 18, 19. The ends of redemption are, that the justice of God might be satisfied; his people reconciled, adopted, sanctified, and brought to glory. The properties of it are these: 1. It is agreeable to all the perfections of God.--2. What a creature never could obtain, and therefore entirely of free grace.--3. It is special and particular.--4. Full and complete.--And, 5, lastly, It is eternal as to its blessings. See articles PROPITIATION, RECONCILIATION, SATISFACTION; and Edwards's History of Redemption; Cole on the Sovereignty of God; Lime Street Lect. lect. 5; Watts's Ruin and Recovery; Dr. Owen on the Death and Satisfaction of Christ; Gill's Body of Divinity.
In general, an act of reforming or correcting an
error or abuse in religion, discipline, or the like. By way of eminence, the
word is used for that great alteration and reformation in the corrupted system
of Christianity, begun by Luther in the year 1517.
Before the period of the reformation, the pope
had in the most audacious manner declared himself the sovereign of the whole
world. All the parts of it which were inhabited by those who were not
Christians, he accounted to be inhabited by nobody; and if Christians took it
into their heads to possess any of those countries, he gave them full liberty to
make war upon the inhabitants without any provocation, and to treat them with
no more humanity than they would have treated wild beasts. The countries, if
conquered, were to be parcelled out according to the pope's pleasure; and
dreadful was the situation of that prince who refused to obey the will of the
holy pontiff. In consequence of this extraordinary authority which the pope had
assumed, he at last granted to the king of Portugal all the countries to the
eastward of Cape Non in Africa, and to the king of Spain all the countries to
the westward of it. In this was completed in his person the character of
Antichrist sitting in the temple of God, and showing himself as God. He had
long before assumed the supremacy belonging to the Deity himself in spiritual
matters; and now he assumed the same supremacy in worldly matters also, giving
the extreme regions of the earth to whom he pleased.
Every thing was quiet, every heretic
exterminated, and the whole Christian world supinely acquiesced to the enormous
absurdities which were inculcated upon them; when, in 1517, the empire of
superstition began to decline, and has continued to do so ever since. The
person who made the first attack on the extravagant superstitions then
prevailing was Martin Luther, the occasion of which is fully related under the
article LUTHERANS.
The reformation began in the city of Wittemberg,
in Saxony, but was not long confined, either to that city or province. In 1520,
the Franciscan friars, who had the care of promulgating indulgences in
Switzerland, were opposed by Zuinglius, a man not inferior in understanding and
knowledge to Luther himself. He proceeded with the greatest vigour, even at the
very beginning, to overturn the whole fabric of popery; but his opinions were
declared erroneous by the universities of Cologne and Louvain. Notwithstanding
this, the magistrates of Zurich approved of his proceedings; and that whole
canton, together with those of Bern, Basil, and Chaffausen, embraced his
opinions.
In Germany, Luther continued to make great
advances, without being in the least intimidated by the ecclesiastical censures
which were thundered against him from all quarters, he being continually
protected by the German princes, either from religious or political motives, so
that his adversaries could not accomplish his destruction, as they had done
that of others. Melancthon, Carlostadius, and other men of eminence, also
greatly forwarded the work of Luther; and in all probability the popish
hierarchy would have soon come to an end, in the northern parts of Europe at
least, had not the emperor Charles V. given a severe check to the progress of
reformation in Germany.
During the confinement of Luther in a castle near
Warburg, the reformation advanced rapidly; almost every city in Saxony
embracing the Lutheran opinions. At this time an alteration in the established
forms of worship was first ventured upon at Wittemberg, by abolishing the
celebration of private masses, and by giving the cup as well as the bread to
the laity in the Lord's supper. In a short time, however, the new opinions were
condemned by the university of Paris, and a refutation of them was attempted by
Henry VIII. of England. But Luther was not to be thus intimitated. He published
his animadversions on both with as much acrimony as if he had been refuting the
meanest adversary; and a controversy managed by such illustrious antagonists
drew a general attention, and the reformers daily gained new converts both in
France and England.
But while the efforts of Luther were thus every
where crowned with success, the divisions began to prevail which have since so
much agitated the reformed churches.--The first dispute was between Luther and
Zuinglius concerning the manner in which the body and blood of Christ were present
in the eucharist. Both parties maintained their tenets with the utmost
obstinacy; and, by their divisions, first gave their adversaries an argument
against them, which to this day the Catholics urge with great force; namely,
that the Protestants are so divided, that it is impossible to know who are
right or wrong; and that there cannot be a stronger proof than these divisions
that the whole doctrine is false. To these intestine divisions were added the
horrors of a civil war, occasioned by oppression on the one hand, and
enthusiasm on the other. See ANABAPTISTS.
These proceedings, however, were checked. Luther
and Melancthon were ordered by the elector of Saxony to draw up a body of laws
relating to the form of ecclesiastical government, the method of public
worship, &c. which was to be proclaimed by heralds throughout his
dominions. He, with Melancthon, had translated part of the New Testament in
1522; on the reading of which the people were astonished to find how different
the laws of Christ were to those which they had imposed by the pope, and to
which they had been subject. The princes and the people saw that Luther's
opinions were founded on truth. They openly renounced the papal supremacy, and
the happy morn of the reformation was welcomed by those who had long sat in
superstitious darkness.
This open resolution so exasperated the patrons
of popery, that they intended to make war on the Lutherans, who prepared for
defence. In 1526, a diet was assembled at Spire, when the emperor's ambassadors
were desired to use their utmost endeavours to suppress all disputes about
religion, and to insist upon the rigorous execution of the sentence which had
been pronounced against Luther at Worms. But this opinion was opposed, and the
diet proved favourable to the reformation. But this tranquillity, which they in
consequence enjoyed, did not last long. In 1529, a new diet was formed, and the
power which had been granted to princes of managing ecclesiastical affairs till
the meeting of a general council, was now revoked, and every change declared
unlawful that should be introduced into the doctrine, discipline, or worship of
the established religion, before the determination of the approaching council
was known. This decree was considered as iniquitous and intolerable by several
members of the diet; and when they found that all their arguments and
remonstrances were in vain, they entered a solemn protest against the decree on
the 19th of April, and appealed to the emperor and a future council. Hence
arose the denomination of Protestants, which from that time has been given to
those who separate from the church of Rome.
Charles V. was in Italy, to whom the dissenting
princes sent ambassadors to lay their grievances before him; but they met with
no encouraging reception from him. The pope and the emperor were in close union
at this time, and they had interviews upon the business. The pope thought the
emperor to be too clement, and alleged that it was his duty to execute
vengeance upon the heretical faction. To this, however, the emperor paid no
regard, looking upon it as unjust to condemn, unheard, a set of men who had
always approved themselves good citizens. The emperor, therefore, set out for
Germany, having already appointed a diet of the empire to be held at Augsburg,
where he arrived, and found there a full assembly of the members of the diet.
Here the gentle and pacific Melancthon had been ordered to draw up a confession
of their faith, which he did, and expressed his sentiments and doctrine with the
greatest elegance and perspicuity; and thus came forth to view the famous
confession of Augsburg.
This was attempted to be refuted by the divines
of the church of Rome, and a controversy took place, which the emperor
endeavoured to reconcile, but without success; all hopes of bringing about a
coalition seemed utterly desperate. The votaries of the church of Rome,
therefore, had recourse to the powerful arguments of imperial edicts and the
force of the secular arm; and, on the 19th of November, a decree was issued by
the emperor's orders every way injurious to the reformers. Upon which they
assembled at Smalcald, where they concluded a league of mutual defence against
all aggressors, by which they formed the Protestant states into one body, and
resolved to apply to the kings of France and England to implore them to
patronize their new confederacy. The king of France, being the avowed rival of
the emperor, determined secretly to cherish those sparks of political discord;
and the king of England, highly incensed against Charles, in complaisance to
whom the pope had long retired, and now openly opposed, his long solicited
divorce, was equally disposed to strengthen a league which might be rendered
formidable to the emperor. Being, however, so taken up with the scheme of
divorce, and of abolishing the papal jurisdiction in England, he had but little
leisure to attend to them. Meanwhile Charles was convinced that it was not a
time to extirpate heresy by violence; and at last terms of pacification were
agreed upon at Nuremberg, and ratified solemnly in the diet at Ratisbon: and
affairs so ordered by Divine Providence, that the Protestant obtained terms
which amounted almost to a toleration of their religion.
Soon after the conclusion of the peace at
Nuremburg, died John, elector of Saxony, who was succeeded by his son John
Frederic, a prince of invincible fortitude and magnanimity, but whose reign was
little better than one continued train of disappointments and calamities. The
religious truce, however, gave new vigour to the reformation. Those who had
hitherto been only secret enemies to the Roman pontiff, now publicly threw off
his yoke; and various cities and provinces of Germany enlisted themselves under
the religious standards of Luther. On the other hand, as the emperor had now no
other hope of terminating the religious disputes but by the meeting of a
general council, he repeated his requests to the pope for that purpose. The
pontiff (Clement VII.) whom the history of past councils filled with the greatest
uneasiness, endeavoured to retard what he could not with decency refuse. At
last, in 1533, he made a proposal by his legate, to assemble a council at
Mantua, Placentia, or Bologna; but the Protestants refused their consent to the
nomination of an Italian council, and insisted that a controversy which had its
rise in the heart of Germany should be determined within the limits of the
empire. The pope, by his usual artifices, eluded the performance of his own
promise; and in 1534, was cut off by death, in the midst of his stratagem. His
successor Paul III. seemed to show less reluctance to the assembling a general
council, and, in the year 1535, expressed his inclination to convoke one at
Mantua; and, in the year following, actually sent circular letters for that
purpose through all the states and kingdoms under his jurisdiction. This
council was summoned by a bull issued out on the second of June 1536, to meet
at Mantua the following year: but several obstacles prevented its meeting; one
of the most material of which was, that Frederic duke of Mantua had no
inclination to receive at once so many guests, some of them very turbulent,
into the place of his residence. On the other hand, the Protestants were firmly
persuaded, that, as the council was assembled in Italy, and by the authority of
the pope alone, the latter must have had an undue influence in that assembly;
of consequence that all things must have been carried by the votaries of Rome.
For this reason they assembled at Smalcald in the year 1537, where they
solemnly protested against this partial and corrupt council; and, at the same
time, had a new summary of their doctrine drawn up by Luther, in order to
present it to the assembled bishops, if it should be required of them. This
summary, which had the title of The Articles of Smalcald, is commonly joined
with the creeds and confessions of the Lutheran church.
After the meeting of the general council in
Mantua was thus prevented, many schemes of accommodation were proposed both by
the emperor and the Protestants; but, by the artifices of the church of Rome,
all of them came to nothing. In 1541, the emperor appointed a meeting at Worms
on the subject of religion, between persons of piety and learning, chosen from
the contending parties. This conference, however, was, for certain reasons,
removed to the diet that was to be held at Ratisbon the same year, and in which
the principal subject of deliberation was a memorial presented by a person
unknown, containing a project of peace. But the conference produced no other
effect than a mutual agreement of the contending parties to refer their matters
to a general council, or, if the meeting of such a council should be prevented,
to the next German diet.
The resolution was rendered ineffectual by a
variety of incidents, which widened the breach, and put off to a farther day
the deliberations which were designed to heal it. The pope ordered his legate
to declare to the diet of Spire, assembled in 1542, that he would, according to
the promise he had already made, assemble a general council, and that Trent
should be the place of its meeting, if the diet had no objection to that city.
Ferdinand, and the princes who adhered to the cause of the pope, gave their
consent to this proposal; but it was vehemently objected to by the Protestants,
both because the council was summoned by the authority of the pope only, and
also because the place was within the jurisdiction of the pope; whereas they
desired a free council, which should not be biased by the diotates nor awed by
the proximity of the pontiff. But this protestation produced no effect. Paul
IIi. persisted in his purpose, and issued out his circular letters for the
convocation of the council, with the approbation of the emperor. In justice to
this pontiff, however, it must be observed, that he showed himself not to be
averse to every reformation. He appointed four cardinals, and three other
persons eminent for their learning, to draw up a plan for the reformation of
the church of Rome in particular. the reformation proposed in this plan was,
indeed, extremely superficial and partial; yet it contained some particulars
which could scarcely have been expected from those who composed it.
All this time the emperor had been labouring to
persuade the Protestants to consent to the meeting of the council at Trent;
but, when he found them fixed in their opposition to this measure, he began to
listen to the sanguinary measures of the pope, and resolved to terminate the
disputes by force of arms. The elector of Saxony and landgrave of Hesse, who
were the chief supporters of the Protestant cause, upon this, took proper
measures to prevent their being surprised and overwhelmed by a superior force;
but, before the horrors of war commenced, the great reformer Luther died in
peace at Ayselben, the place of his nativity, in 1546.
The emperor and the pope had mutually resolved on
the destruction of all who should dare to oppose the council of Trent. The
meeting of it was to serve as a signal for taking up arms; and accordingly its
deliberations were scarcely begun, in 1546, when the Protestants perceived
undoubted signs of the approaching storm, and a formidable union betwixt the
emperor and the pope, which threatened to crush and overwhelm them at once.
This year, indeed, there had been a new conference at Ratisbon upon the old
subject of accommodating differences in religion; but, from the manner in which
the debates were carried on, it plainly appeared that these differences could
only be decided in the field of battle. The council of Trent, in the mean time,
promulgated their decrees; while the reformed princes, in the diet of Ratisbon,
protested against their authority, and were on that account prescribed by the
emperor, who raised an army to reduce them to obedience.
The elector of Saxony and the landgrave of Hesse
led their forces into Bavaria against the emperor, and cannonaded his camp in
Ingoldstadt. It was supposed that this would bring on an engagement, which
would probably have been advantageous to the cause of the reformed; but this
was prevented chiefly by the perfidy of Maurice, duke of Saxony, who invaded
the dominions of his uncle. Divisions were also fomented among the confederate
princes by the dissimulation of the emperor; and France failed in paying the subsidy
which had been promised by its monarch; all which so discouraged the heads of
the Protestant party, that their army soon dispersed, and the elector of
homewards. But he was pursued by the emperor, who made several forced marches
with a view to destroy his enemy before he should have time to recover his
vigour. The two armies met near Muhlberg, on the Elbe, on the 24th of April,
1547; and, after a bloody action, the elector was entirely defeated, and
himself taken prisoner. Maurice, who had so basely betrayed him, was now
declared elector of Saxony; and, by his entreaties, Philip, langrave of Hesse,
the other chief of the Protestants, was persuaded to throw himself on the mercy
of the emperor, and to implore his pardon. To this he consented, relying on the
promise of Charles for obtaining forgiveness, and being restored to liberty;
but, notwithstanding these expectations, he was unjustly detained prisoner, by
a scandalous violation of the most solemn convention.
The affairs of the Protestants now seemed to be
desperate. In the diet of Augsburg, which was soon after called, the emperor
required the Protestants to leave the decision of these religious disputes to
the wisdom of the council which was to meet at Trent. The greatest part of the
members consented to this proposal, being convinced by the powerful argument of
an imperial army, which was at hand to dispel the darkness from the eyes of
such as might otherwise have been blind to the force of Charles's reasoning.
However, this general submission did not produce the effect which was expected
from it. A plague which broke out, or was said to do so, in the city, caused
the greatest part of the bishops to retire to Bologna, by which means the
council was in effect dissolved; nor could all the entreaties and remonstrances
of the emperor prevail upon the pope to re-assemble it without delay. During
this interval, therefore, the emperor judged it necessary to fall upon some
method of accommodating the religious differences, and maintaining peace until
the council so long expected should be finally obtained. With this view he
ordered Julius Pelugius, bishop of Naumberg, Michael Sidonius, a creature of
the pope, and John Agricola, a native of Ayselben, to draw up a formulary which
might serve as a rule of faith and worship till the council should be
assembled; but as this was only a temporary expedient, and had not the force of
a permanent or perpetual institution, it thence obtained the name of the
Interim.
This project of Charles was formed partly with a
design to vent his resentment against the pope, and partly to answer other
political purposes. It contained all the essential doctrines of the church of
Rome, though considerably softened by the artful terms which were employed, and
which were quite different from those employed before and after this period by
the council of Trent. There was even an affected ambiguity in many of the
expressions, which made them susceptible of different senses, and applicable to
the sentiments of both communions. The consequence of all this was, that the
emperial creed was reprobated by both parties. (See INTERIM.) In the year 1542,
the pope (Paul III.) died; and was succeeded by Julius III. who, at the
repeated solicitations of the emperor, consented to the re-assembling of a
council of Trent. A diet was again held at Augsburg, under the cannon of the
imperial army, and Charles laid the matter before the princes of the empire.
Most of those present gave their consent to it, and, among the rest, Maurice
elector of Saxony; who consented on the following conditions: 1. That the
points of doctrine which had already been decided there should be
re-examined.--2. That this examination should be made in presence of the
Protestant divines.--3. That the Saxon Protestants should have a liberty of
voting as well as of deliberating in the council.--4. That the pope should not
pretend to preside in the assembly, either in person or by his legates. This
declaration of Maurice was read in the diet, and his deputies insisted upon its
being entered into the registers, which the archbishop of Mentz obstinately
refused. The diet was concluded in 1551; and, at its breaking up, the emperor
desired the assembled princes and states to prepare all things for the
approaching council, and promised to use his utmost endeavours to procure
moderation and harmony, impartiality and charity, in the transaction of that
assembly.
On the breaking up of the diet, the Protestants
took such steps as they thought most proper for their own safety. The Saxons
employed Melancthon, and the Wirtembergers Brengius, to draw up confessions of
faith to be laid before the new council. The Saxon divines, however, proceeded
no farther than Nuremberg, having received secret orders from Maurice to stop
there; for the elector perceiving that Charles had formed designs against the
liberties of the German princes, resolved to take the most effectual measures
for crushing his ambition at once. He therefore entered with the utmost secrecy
and expedition into an alliance with the king of France and several of the
German princes, for the security of the rights and liberties of the empire;
after which, assembling a powerful army in 1552, he marched against the
emperor, who lay with a handful of troops at Inspruck, and expected no such thing.
By this sudden and unforeseen accident, Charles was so much dispirited, that he
was willing to make peace almost on any terms. The consequence of this was,
that he concluded a treaty at Passau, which by the Protestants is considered as
the basis of their religious liberty. By the first three articles of this
treaty it was agreed that Maurice and the confederates should lay down their
arms, and lend their troops to Ferdinand, to assist him against the Turks; and
that the landgrave of Hesse should be set at liberty. By the fourth it was
agreed that the rule of faith called the Interim should be considered as null
and void; that the contending parties should enjoy the free and undisturbed
exercise of their religion until a diet should be assembled to determine
amicably the present disputes (which diet was to meet in the space of six
months;) and that this religious liberty should continue always, in case it
should be found impossible to come to a uniformity in doctrine and worship. It
was also determined, that all those who had suffered banishment or any other
calamity, on account of their having been concerned in the league or war of
Smalcald, should be reinstated in their privileges, possessions, and
employments; that the imperial chamber at Spire should be open to the
Protestants as well as to the Catholics; and that there should always be a
certain number of Lutherans in that high court. To this peace Albert, marquis
of Brandenburg, refused to subscribe; and continued the war against the Roman
Catholics, committed such ravages in the empire, that a confederacy was at last
formed against him. At the head of this confederacy was Maurice, elector of
Saxony, who died of a wound he received in a battle fought on the occasion in
1553.
The assembly of the diet promised by Charles was
prevented by various accidents; however, it met at Augsburg, in 1555, where it
was opened by Ferdinand in the name of the emperor, and terminated those
deplorable calamities which had so long desolated the empire. After various debates
the following acts were passed on the twenty-fifth of September:--That the
Protestants who followed the confession of Augsburg should be for the future
considered as entirely free from the jurisdiction of the Roman pontiff and from
the authority and superintendence of the bishops; that they were left at
perfect liberty to enact laws for themselves relating to their religious
sentiments, discipline, and worship; that all the inhabitants of the German
empire should be allowed to judge for themselves in religious matters, and to
join themselves to that church whose doctrine and worship they thought the most
pure and consonant to the spirit of true Christianity; and that all those who
should injure or prosecute any person under religious pretences, and on account
of their opinions, should be declared and proceeded against as public enemies
of the empire, invaders of its liberty, and disturbers of its peace.
Thus was the reformation established in many
parts of the German empire, where it continues to this day; nor have the
efforts of the popish powers at any time been able to suppress it or even to
prevent its gaining ground. It was not, however, in Germany alone that a
reformation of religion took place. Almost all the kingdoms of Europe began to
open their eyes to the truth about the same time. The reformed religion was
propagated in Sweden, soon after Luther's rupture with the church of Rome, by
one of his disciples named Olaus Patri. The zealous efforts of this missionary
were seconded by Gustavus Vasa, whom the Swedes had raised to the throne in the
place of Christiern, king of Denmark, whose horrid barbarity lost him the
crown. This prince, however, was as prudent as he was zealous; and, as the
minds of the Swedes were in a fluctuating state, he wisely avoided all kinds of
vehemence and precipitation in spreading the new doctrine. Accordingly the
first object of his attention was the instruction of his people in the sacred
doctrines of the holy Scriptures; for which purpose he invited into his dominions
several learned Germans, and spread abroad through the kingdom the Swedish
translation of the Bible that had been made by Olaus Petri. Some time after
this, in 1526, he appointed a conference at Upsal, between the reformer and
Peter Gallius, a zealous defender of the ancient superstition, in which each of
the champions was to bring forth his arguments, that it might be seen on which
side the truth lay. In this dispute Olaus obtained a signal victory; which
contributed much to confirm Gustavus in his persuasion of the truth of Luther's
doctrine, and to promote its progress in Sweden. The following year another
event gave the finishing stroke to its propagation and success. This was the
assembly of the states at Westernas, where Gustavus recommended the doctrine of
the reformers with such zeal, that after warm debates, fomented by the clergy
in general, it was unanimously resolved that the reformation introduced by
Luther should have place in Sweden. This resolution was principally owing to
the firmness and magnanimity of Gustavus, who declared publicly, that he would
lay down the sceptre, and retire from the kingdom, rather than rule a people
enslaved by the orders and authority of the pope, and more controlled by the
tyranny of their bishops than by the laws of their monarchs. From this time the
papal empire in Sweden was entirely overthrown, and Gustavus declared head of
the church.
In Denmark, the reformation was introduced as
early as the year 1521, in consequence of the ardent desire discovered by
Christiern II. of having his subjects instructed in the doctrines of Luther.
This monarch, notwithstanding his cruelty, for which his name has been rendered
odious, was nevertheless desirous of delivering his dominions from the tyranny
of the church of Rome. For this purpose, in the year 1520, he sent for Martin
Reinard, one of the disciples of Carlostadt, out of Saxony, and appointed him
professor of divinity at Hasnia; and after his death which happened in 1521, he
invited Carlostadt himself to fill that important place. Carlostadt accepted of
this office, indeed, but in a short time returned to Germany; upon which
Christiern used his utmost endeavours to engage Luther to visit his dominions,
but in vain. However, the progress of Christiern in reforming the religion of
his subjects, or rather of advancing his own power, above that of the church,
was checked, in the year 1523, by a conspiracy, by which he was deposed and
banished; his uncle Frederic, duke of Holstein and Sleswic, being appointed his
successor.
Frederic conducted the reformation with much
greater prudence than his predeccessor. He permitted the Protestant doctors to
preach publicly the sentiments of Luther, but did not venture to change the
established government and discipline of the church. However, he contributed
greatly to the progress of the reformation by his successful attempts in favour
of religious liberty in an assembly of the states held at Odensee in 1527. Here
he procured the publication of a famous edict, by which every subject of
Denmark was declared free either to adhere to the tenets of the church of Rome,
or to the doctrine of Luther. The papal tyranny was totally destroyed by his
successor Christiern III. He began by suppressing the despotic authority of the
bishops, and restoring to their lawful owners a great part of the wealth and
possessions which the church had acquired by various stratagems. This was
followed by a plan of religious doctrine, worship, and discipline, laid down by
Bugenhagius, whom the king had sent for from Wittemberg for that purpose; and
in 1539, an assembly of the states at Odensee gave a solemn sanction to all
these transactions.
In France, also, the reformation began to make
some progress very early. Margaret, queen of Navarre, sister to Francis I. the
perpetual rival of Charles V. was a great friend to the new doctrine; and it
appears that, as early as the year 1523, there were in several of the provinces
of France great numbers of people who had conceived the greatest aversion both
to the doctrine and tyranny of the church of Rome; among whom were many of the
first rank and dignity, and even some of the episcopal order. But as their
number increased daily, and troubles and commotions were excited in several
places on account of the religious differences, the authority of the king
intervened, and many persons eminent for their virtue and piety were put to
death in the most barbarous manner. Indeed, Francis, who had either no religion
at all, or, at best, no fixed and consistent system of religious principles,
conducted himself towards the Protestants in such a manner as best answered his
private views. Sometimes he resolved to invite Melancthon into France, probably
with a view to please his sister, the queen of Navarre, whom he loved tenderly,
and who had strongly imbibed the Protestant principles. At other times he
exercised the most infernal cruelty towards the reformed; and once made the
following mad declaration, That, if he thought the blood of his arm was tainted
by the Lutheran heresy, he would have it cut off: and that he would not even
spare his own children, if they entertained sentiments contrary to those of the
Catholic church.
About this time the famous Calvin began to draw
the attention of the public, but more especially of the queen of Navarre. His
zeal exposed him to danger; and the friends of the reformation, whom Francis
was daily committing to the flames, placed him more than once in the most
perilous situation, from which he was delivered by the interposition of the queen
of Navarre. He therefore retired out of France to Basil, in Switzerland, where
he published his Christian Institutions, and became afterwards so famous.
Those among the French who first renounced the
jurisdiction of the Romish church are commonly called Lutherans by the writers
of those early times; hence it has been supposed that they had all imbibed the
peculiar sentiments of Luther. But this appears by no means to have been the
case; for the vicinity of the cities of Geneva, Lausanne, &c. which had
adopted the doctrines of Calvin, produced a remarkable effect upon the French
Protestant churches; insomuch that, about the middle of this century, they all
entered into communion with the church of Geneva. The French Protestants were
called Huguenots, (see HUGUENOTS,) by their adversaries, by way of contempt.
Their fate was very severe, being persecuted with unparalleled fury; and though
many princes of the blood, and of the first nobility, had embraced their
sentiments, yet in no part of the world did the reformers suffer so much. At
last, all commotions were quelled by the fortitude and magnanimity of Henry IV.
who, in the year 1598, granted all his subjects full liberty of conscience by
the famous edict of Nantes, and seemed to have thoroughly established the
reformation throughout his dominions. During the minority of Louis XIV.
however, this edict was revoked by cardinal Mazarine, since which time the
Protestants have often been cruelly persecuted: nor was the profession of the
reformed religion in France at any time so safe as in most other countries of
Europe.
In the other parts of Europe the opposition to
the church of Rome was but faint and ambiguous before the diet of Augsburg.
Before that period, however, it appears, from undoubted testimony, that the
doctrine of Luther had made a considerable, though probably secret progress
through Spain, Hungary, Bohemia, Britain, Poland, and the Netherlands; and had
in all these countries many friends, of whom several repaired to Wittemberg, in
order to enlarge their knowledge by means of Luther's conversation. Some of
these countries threw off the Romish yoke entirely, and in others a prodigious
number of families embraced the principles of the reformed religion. It is
certain, indeed, and the Roman Catholics themselves acknowledge it without
hesitation, that the papal doctrines and authority would have fallen into ruin
in all parts of the world at once, had not the force of the secular arm been
employed to support the tottering edifice. In the Netherlands, particularly,
the most grievious persecutions took place, so that by the emperor Charles V.
upwards of 100,000 were destroyed, while still greater cruelties were exercised
upon the people by his son Philip II. The revolt of the United Provinces
however, and motives of real policy, at last put a stop to these furious
proceedings; and though in many provinces of the Netherlands, the establishment
of the Popish religion was still continued, the Protestants have been long free
from the danger of persecution on account of their principles.
The reformation made a considerable progress in
Spain and Italy soon after the rupture between Luther and the Roman pontiff. In
all the provinces of Italy, but more especially in the territories of Venice,
Tuscany, and Naples, the superstition of Rome lost ground, and great numbers of
people of all ranks expressed an aversion to the papal yoke. This occasioned
violent and dangerous commotions in the kingdom of Naples in the year 1546;
which, however, were at last quelled by the united efforts of Charles V. and
his viceroy Don Pedro di Toledo. In several places the pope put a stop to the
progress of the reformation by letting loose the inquisitors, who spread
dreadful marks of their barbarity through the greatest part of Italy. Those
formidable ministers of superstition put so many to death, and perpetrated such
horrid acts of cruelty, and oppression, that most of the reformed consulted
their safety by a voluntary exile, while others returned to the religion of
Rome, at least in external appearance.
But the inquisition, which frightened into the profession of popery several
Protestants in other parts of Italy, could never make its way into the kingdom
of Naples; nor could either the authority or entreaties of the pope engage the
Neapolitans to admit even visiting inquisitors.
In Spain, several people embraced the Protestant
religion, not only from the controversies of Luther, but even from those
divines whom Charles V. had brought with him into Germany in order to refute the
doctrines of Luther; for these doctors imbibed the pretended heresy, instead of
refuting it, and propagated it more or less on their return home. But the
inquisition, which could obtain no footing in Naples, reigned triumphant in
Spain; and by the most dreadful methods frightened the people back into popery,
and suppressed the desire of exchanging their superstition for a more rational
plan of religion. It was, indeed, presumed that Charles himself died a
Protestant; and, it seems to be certain, that, when the approach of death had
dissipated those schemes of ambition and grandeur which had so long blinded
him, his sentiments became much more rational and agreeable to Christianity
than they had ever been. All the ecclesiastics who had attended him, as soon as
he expired, were sent to the inquisition, and committed to the flames, or put
to death by some other method equally terrible. Such was the fate of Augustine
Casal, the emperor's preacher; of Constantine Pontius, his confessor; of
Egidius, whom he had named to the bishopric of Tortosa; of Bartholomew de
Caranza, a Dominican, who had been confessor to king Philip and queen Mary;
with twenty others of less note.
In England, the principles of the reformation
began to be adopted as soon as an account of Luther's doctrines could be
conveyed thither. In that kingdom there were still great remains of the sect
called Lollards, whose doctrine resembled that of Luther; and among whom, of
consequence, the sentiments of our reformer gained great credit. Henry VIII.
king of England at that time, was a violent partisan of the church of Rome, and
had a particular veneration for the writings of Thomas Aquinal. Being informed
that Luther spoke of his favourite author with contempt, he conceived a violent
prejudice against the reformer, and even wrote against him, as we have already
observed. Luther did not hesitate at writing against his majesty, overcame him
in argument, and treated him with very little ceremony. The first step towards
public reformation, however, was not taken till the year 1529. Great complaints
had been made in England, and of a very ancient date, of the usurpations of the
clergy; and, by the prevalence of the Lutheran opinions, these complaints were
now become more general than before. The House of Commons, finding the occasion
favourable, passed several bills, restraining the impositions of the clergy;
but what threatened the ecclesiastical order with the greatest danger, were,
the severe reproaches thrown out almost without opposition in the House against
the dissolute lives, ambition, and avarice of the priests, and their continual
encroachments on the privileges of the laity. The bills for regulating the
clergy met with opposition in the House of Lords; and bishop Fisher imputed
them to want of faith in the Commons, and to a formed design, proceeding from
heretical and Lutheran principles, of robbing the church of her patrimony, and
overturning the national religion. The Commons, however, complained to the
king, by their speaker, sir Thomas Audley, of these reflections thrown out
against them; and the bishop was obliged to retract his words.
Though Henry had not the least idea of rejecting
any, even of the most absurd Romish superstitions, yet, as the oppressions of
the clergy suited very ill with the violence of his own temper, he was pleased
with every opportunity of lessening their power. In the parliament of 1531 he
showed his design of humbling the clergy in the most effectual manner. An
obsolete statute was revived, from which it was pretended that it was criminal
to submit to the legatine power which had been exercised by cardinal Wolsey. By
this stroke the whole body of the clergy was declared guilty at once. They were
too well acquainted with Henry's disposition, however, to reply, that their
ruin would have been the certain consequence of their not submitting to
Wolsey's commission, which had been given by royal authority. Instead of making
any defence of this kind, they chose to throw themselves upon the mercy of
their sovereign; which, however, it cost them 118,840l. to procure. A
confession was likewise extorted from them, that the king was protector and
supreme head of the church of England; though some of them had the dexterity to
get a clause inserted which invalidated the whole submission, viz. in so far as
is permitted by the law of Christ.
The king, having thus begun to reduce the power
of the clergy, kept no bounds with them afterwards. He did not, indeed, attempt
any reformation in religious matters; nay, he presecuted most violently such as
did attempt this in the least. Indeed, the most essential article of his creed
seems to have been his own supremacy; for whoever denied this was sure to
suffer the most severe penalties, whether Protestant or Papist.
He died in 1547, and was succeeded by his only
son Edward VI. This amiable prince, whose early youth was crowned with that
wisdom, sagacity, and virtue, that would have done honour to advanced years,
gave new spirit and vigour to the Protestant cause, and was its brightest
ornament, as well as its most effectual support. He encouraged learned and
pious men of foreign countries to settle in England, and addressed a particular
invitation to Martin Bucer and Paul Fagius, whose moderation added a lustre to
their other virtues, that by the ministry and labours of these eminent men, in
concert with those of the friends of the reformation in England, he might purge
his dominions from the sordid fictions of popery, and establish the pure
doctrines of Christianity in their place. For this purpose he issued out the
wisest orders for the restoration of true religion; but his reign was too short
to accomplish fully such a glorious purpose. In the year 1553 he was taken from
his loving and afflicted subjects, whose sorrow was inexpressible, and suited
to their loss. His sister Mary, (the daughter of Catharine of Arragon, from
whom Henry had been separated by the famous divorce,) a furious bigot to the
church of Rome, and a princess whose natural character, like the spirit of her
religion, was despotic and cruel, succeeded him on the British throne, and
imposed anew the arbitrary laws and the tyrannical yoke of Rome upon the people
of England. Nor were the methods which she employed in the cause of
superstition better than the cause itself, or tempered by any sentiments of
equity or compassion. Barbarous tortures, and death in the most shocking forms,
awaited those who opposed her will, or made the least stand against the
restoration of popery; and, among many other victime, the learned and pious
Cranmer, archibishop of Canterbury, who had been one of the most illustrious
instruments of the reformation in England, fell a sacrifice to her fury. This
odious scene of persecution was happily concluded in the year 1558 by the death
of the queen, who left no issue; and, as soon as her successor the lady
Elizabeth ascended the throne, all things assumed a new and pleasing aspect.
This illustrious princes, whose sentiments, counsels, and projects, breathed a
spirit superior to the natural softness and delicacy of her sex, exerted this
vigorous and manly spirit in the defence of oppressed conscience and expiring
liberty, broke anew the despotic yoke of papal authority and superstition; and,
delivered her people from the bondage of Rome, established that form of
religious doctrine and ecclesiastical government which still subsists in
England. This religious establishment differed in some respects from the plan
that had been formed by those whom Edward Vi. had employed for promoting the
cause of the reformation, and approaches nearer to the rites and discipline of
former times; though it is widely different, and in the most important points,
entirely opposite to the principles of the Roman hierarchy.
The cause of the reformation underwent in Ireland
the same vicissitudes and revolutions that had attended it in England. When
Henry VIII. after the abolition of the papal authority, was declared supreme
head upon earth of the church of England, George Brown, a native of England,
and a monk of the Augustine order, whom that monarch had created, in the year
1535, archbishop of Dublin, began to act with the utmost vigour in consequence
of this change in the hierarchy. He purged the churches of his diocese from
superstition in all its various forms, pulled down images, destroyed relics,
abolished absurd and idolatrous rites; and, by the influence as well as
authority he had in Ireland, caused the king's supremacy to be acknowledged in
that nation. Henry showed, soon after, that this supremacy was not a vain title;
for his banished the monks out of that kingdom, confiscated their revenues, and
destroyed their convents. In the reign of Edward VI. still further progress was
made in the removal of popish superstitions by the zealous labours of bishop
Brown, and the auspicious encouragement he granted to all who exerted
themselves in the cause of the reformation. But the death of this excellent
prince and the accession of queen Mary, had like to have changed the face of
affairs in Ireland as much as in England; but her designs were disappointed by
a very curious adventure, of which the following account has been copied from
the papers of Richard earl of Cork:--"Queen Mary having dealt severely
with the Protestants in England, about the latter end of her reign, signed a
commission for to take the same course with them in Ireland; and, to execute
the same with greater force, she nominates Dr. Cole one of the commissioners.
This doctor coming with the commission to Chester on his journey, the mayor of
that city, hearing that her majesty was sending a messenger into Ireland, and
he being a churchman, waited on the doctor, who in discourse with the mayor
taketh out of a cloke-bag a leather box, saying unto him, Here is a commission
that shall lash the heretics of Ireland, calling the Protestants by that title.
The good woman of the house being well affected to the Protestant religion, and
also having a brother, named John Edmunds, of the same, then a citizen in
Dublin, was much troubled at the doctor's words: but, watching her convenient
time while the mayor took his leave, and the doctor complimented him down the
stairs, she opens the box, takes the commissionout, and places in lieu thereof
a sheet of paper with a pack of cards wrapt up therein, the knave of clubs
being faced uppermost. The doctor coming up to his chamber, suspecting nothing
of what had been done, put up the box as formerly. The next day, going to the
water-side, wind and weather serving him, he sails towards Ireland, and landed
on the 7th of October, 1558, at Dublin. Then coming to the castle, the lord
Fitz Walter, being lord-deputy, sent for him to come before him and the privy
council; who coming in, after he had made a speech relating upon what account
he came over, he presents the box unto the lord-deputy; who causing it to be
opened, that the secretary might read the commission, there was nothing save a
pack of cards with the knave of clubs uppermost; which not only startled the
lord-deputy and council, but the doctor, who assured them he had a commission,
but knew not how it was gone. Then the lord-deputy made answer, Let us have
another commission, and we will shuffle the cards in the mean while. The doctor
being troubled in his mind, went away, and returned into England, and coming to
the court, obtained another commission; but, staying for a wind on the
waterside, news came to him that the queen was dead: and thus God preserved the
Protestants of Ireland."--Queen Elizabeth was so delighted with this
story, which was related to her by lord Fitz-Walter on his return to England,
that she sent for Elizabeth Edmunds, whose husband's named was Mattershad, and
gave her a pension of 40l. during her life.
In Scotland the seeds of reformation were very
early sown by several noblemen who had resided in Germany during the religious
disputes there; but for many years it was suppressed by the power of the pope,
seconded by inhuman laws and barbarous executions. The most eminent opposer of
the papal jurisdiction was John Knox, a disciple of Calvin, a man of great zeal
and invincible fortitude. On all occasions he raised the drooping spirits of
the reformers, and encouraged them to go on with their work, notwithstanding
the opposition and treachery of the queen-regent; till at last, in 1561, by the
assistance of an English army sent by Elizabeth, popery was, in a manner,
totally extirpated throughout the kingdom. From this period the form of
doctrine, worship, and discipline, established by Calvin at Geneva, has had the
ascendancy in Scotland.
On the review of this article, what reason have
we to admire Infinite Wisdom, in making human events apparently fortuitous,
subservient to the spread of the Gospel! What reason to adore that Divine Power
which was here evidently manifested in opposition to all the powers of the
world! What reason to praise that Goodness, which thus caused light and truth
to break forth for the happiness and salvation of millions of the human race!
For farther information on this interesting
subject we refer our readers to the works of Burnet and Brandt; to Beausobre's
Historic de la Reformation dans l' Empire, et les Etate de la Confession d'
Augusbourg depuis 1517-1530, in 4 vols. 8vo. Berlin, 1785; Mosheim's
Ecclesiastical History; and particularly the Appendix to vol. iv. p. 136, on the
spirit of the reformers, by Dr. Maclaine. See also Sleidan De. Statu Religionis
et Reipublicae Carolo V.; Father Paul's Hist. of the Council of Trent;
Robertson's Hist. of Charles V.; Knox's and Dr. Gilbert Steward's Hist. of the
Reformation in Scotland; Enc. Brit.; An Essay on the Spirit and Influence of
the Reformation by Luther, by B. C. Villiers, which work obtained the prize on
this question (proposed by the National Institute of France in the public
sitting of the 15th Germinal, in the year 10,) "What has been the
influence of the reformation by Luther on the political situation, of the
different states of Europe, and on the progress of knowledge? H. Moore's Hints
to a Young Princess, vol. ii. ch. 35.
See CHURCH REFORMED.
A term first applied to the French Protestants, who, by the revocation of the edict of Nantes, were constrained to fly from persecution, and take refuge in foreign countries. Since that time, however, it has been extended to all such as leave their country in times of distress. See HUGUENOTS.
Money allowed by government to the Dissenters. The origin of it was in the year 1723. As the Dissenters approved themselves strong friends to the house of Brunswick, they enjoyed favour; and, being excluded all lucrative preferment in the church, the prime minister wished to reward them for their loyalty, and, by a retaining fee, preserve them steadfast. A considerable sum, therefore, was annually lodged with the heads of the Presbyterians, Independents, and Baptists, to be distributed among the necessitous ministers of their congregations.
A new birth; that work of the Holy Spirit by which we experience a change of heart. It is to be distinguished from baptism which is an external rite, though some have confounded them together. Nor does it signify a mere reformation of the outward conduct. Nor is it a conversion from one sect or creed to another; or even from atheism. Nor are new faculties given in this change. Nor does it consist in new revelations, succession of terrors or consolations; or any whisper as it were from God to the heart, concerning his secret love, choice, or purpose to save us. It is expressed in Scripture by being born again, John, iii. 7. born from above, so it may be rendered, John, iii. 2, 7, 27. being quickened, Ephes. ii. 1. Christ formed in the heart, Gal. iv. 12. a partaking of the Divine nature, 2 Pet. i. 4. The efficient cause of regeneration is the Divine Spirit. That man is not the author of it is evident, if we consider, 1. The case in which men are before it takes place; a state of ignorance and inability, John, iii. 4.--2. The nature of the work shows plainly that it is not in the power of men to do it: it is called a creation, a production of a new principle which was not before, and which man could not himself produce, Eph. ii. 8, 10.--3. It is expressly denied to be of men, but declared to be of God, John, i. 12, 13. 1 John, iii. 9. The instrumental cause of it may be so called, is the word of God, Jam. i. 18. 1 Cor. iv. 15. The evidence of it are, conviction of sin, holy sorrow, deep humility, knowledge, faith, repentance, love, and devotedness to God's glory. The properties of it are these: 1. It is a passive work, and herein it differs from conversion. In regeneration we are passive, and receive from God; in conversion we are active, and turn to him.--2. It is an irresistible, or rather an invincible work of God's grace, Eph. iii. 8.--3. It is an instantaneous act, for there can be no medium between life and death; and here it differs from sanctification, which is progressive.--4. It is a complete act, and perfect in its kind; a change of the whole man, 2 Cor. v. 17.--5. It is a great and important act, both as to its author and effects, Eph. ii. 4, 5.--6. It is an internal act, not consisting in bare outward forms, Ezek. xxxvi. 26, 27.--7. Visible as to its effects, 1 John, iii. 14.--8. Delightful, 1 Pet. i. 8.--9. Necessary, John, iii. 3.--10. It is an act, the blessings of which we can never finally lose, John, xiii. 1. See CALLING, CONVERSION; and Charnock's Works, vol. ii. p. 1. to 230; Cole and Wright, but especially Witherspoon on Regeneration; Doddridge's Ten Sermons on the Subject; Dr. Gill's Body of Divinity, article Regeneration; Dr. Owen on the Spirit; Lime Street Lectures, ser. 8.
In the Roman church, the remains of the bodies
or clothes of saints or martyrs, and the instruments by which they were put to
death, devoutly preserved, in honour to their memory; kissed, revered, and
carried in procession.
The respect which was justly due to the martyrs
and teachers of the Christian faith, in a few ages, increased almost to
adoration; and at length adoration was really paid both to departed saints, and
to relics of holy men or holy things. The abuses of the church of Rome with
respect to relics, are very flagrant and notorious; for such was the rage for
them at one time, that, as F. Mabillon, a Benedictine, justly complains, the
altars were loaded with suspected relics; numerous spurious ones being every
were offered to the piety and devotion of the faithful. He adds, too, that
bones are often consecrated, which, so far from belonging to saints, probably
do not belong to Christians. From the catacombs numerous relics have been
taken, and yet it is not known who were the persons interred therein. In the
eleventh century, relics were tried by fire, and those which did not consume
were reckoned genuine, and the rest not. Relics were, and still are, preserved
on the altars whereon mass is celebrated; a square hole being made in the
middle of the altar big enough to receive the hand; and herein is the relic
deposited, being first wrapped in red silk, and enclosed in a leaden box.
The Romanists plead antiquity in behalf of
relics; for the Manichees, out of hatred to the flesh, which they considered as
an evil principle, refused to honour the relics of saints; which is reckoned a
kind of proof that the Catholics did it in the first ages.
We know, indeed, that the touching of linen
clothes, or relics, from an opinion of some extraordinary virtue derived
therefrom, was as ancient as the first ages, there being a hole made in the
coffins of the forty martyrs at Constantinople expressly for that purpose. The
honouring the relics of saints, on which the church of Rome afterwards founded
her superstitious and lucrative use of them, as objects of devotion, as a kind
of charms, or amulets, and as instruments of pretended miracles, appears to
have originated in a very ancient custom that prevailed among Christians, of
assembling at the cemeteries or burying places of the martyrs, for the purpose
of commemorating them, and of performing divine worship. When the profession of
Christianity obtained the protection of civil government, under Constantine the
Great, stately churches were erected over sepulchres, and their names and
memories were treated with every possible token of affection and respect. This
reverence, however, gradually exceeded all reasonable bounds; and those prayers
and religious services were thought to have a peculiar sanctity and virtue
which were performed over their tombs: hence the practice which afterwards
obtained of depositing relics of saints and martyrs under the altars in all
churches. This practice was then thought of such importance, that St. Ambrose
would not consecrate a church because it had no relics; and the council of
Constantinople in Trullo ordained, that those altars should be demolished under
which there were found no relics. The rage of procuring relics for this and
other purposes of a similar nature became so excessive, that in 386, the
emperor Theodosius the Great was obliged to pass a law, forbidding the people
to dig up the bodies of the martyrs, and to traffic in their relics.
Such was the origin of that respect for sacred
relics, which afterwards was perverted into a formal worship of them, and
became the occasion of innumerable processions, pilgrimages, and miracles, from
which the church of Rome hath derived incredible advantage. In the end of the
ninth century it was not sufficient to reverence departed saints, and to
confide in their intercessions and succours; to clothe them with an imaginary
power of healing diseases, working miracles, and delivering from all sorts of
calamities and dangers; their bones, their clothes, the apparel and furniture
they had possessed during their lives, the very ground which they had touched,
or in which their putrefied carcasses were laid, were treated with a stupid
veneration, and supposed to retain the marvellous virtue of healing all
disorders, both of body and mind, and of defending such as possessed them
against all the assaults and devices of the devil. The consequence of all this
was, that every one was eager to provide himself with these salutary remedies;
consequently great numbers undertook fatiguing and perilous voyages, and
subjected themselves to all sorts of hardships; while others made use of this
delusion to accumulate their riches, and to impose upon the miserable multitude
by the most impious and shocking inventions. As the demand for relics was
prodigious and universal, the clergy employed the utmost dexterity to satisfy
all demands, and were far from being nice in the methods they used for that
end. The bodies of the saints were sought by fasting and prayer, instituted by
the priest, in order to obtain a divine answer, and an infallible direction;
and this pretended direction never failed to accomplish their desires: the holy
carcass was always found, and that always in consequence, as they impiously
gave out, of the suggestion and inspiration of God himself. Each discovery of
this kind was attended with excessive demonstrations of joy, and animated the
zeal of these devout seekers to enrich the church still more and more with this
new kind of treasure. Many travelled with this view into the eastern provinces,
and frequented the places which Christ and his disciples had honoured with
their presence; that with the bones and other sacred remains of the first
heralds of the Gospel, they might comfort dejected minds, calm trembling
consciences, save sinking states, and defend their inhabitants from all sorts
of calamities. Nor did these pious travellers return home empty: the craft,
dexterity, and knavery of the Greeks, found a rich prey in the stupid credulity
of the Latin relic-hunters, and made a profitable commerce of this new
devotion. The latter paid considerable sums for legs and arms, skulls, and
jaw-bones (several of which were Pagan, and some not human,) and other things
that were supposed to have belonged to the primitive worthies of the Christian
church; and thus the Latin churches came to the possession of those celebrated
relics of St. Mark, St. James, St. Bartholomew, Cyprian, Pantaleon, and others,
which they show at this day with so much ostentation. But there were many, who,
unable to procute for themselves these spiritual treasures by voyages and
prayers, had recourse to violence and theft; for all sorts of means, and all
sorts of attempts, in a cause of this nature, were considered, when successful,
as pious and acceptable to the Supreme Being. Besides the arguments from
antiquity, to which the Papists refer in vindication of their worship of
relics, of which the reader may form some judgment from this article,
Bellarmine appeals to Scripture in support of it; and cites the following
passages, viz. Exod. xiii. 19. Deut. xxxiv. 6. 2 Kings, xiii. 21. 2 Kings,
xxiii. 16, 17, 18. Isaiah, xi. 10. Mat. xi. 20, 21, 22. Acts, v. 12, 15. Acts,
xix. 11, 12.
The Roman Catholics in Great Britain do not
acknowledge any worship to be due to relics, but merely a high veneration and
respect, by which means they think they honour God, who, they say, has often
wrought very extraordinary miracles by them. But, however proper this
veneration and respect may be, its abuse has been so great and so general, as
fully to warrant the rejection of them altogether.
Relics are forbidden to be used or brought into
England by several statutes; and justices of peace are empowered to search
houses for popish books and relics, which, when found, are to be defaced, and
burnt, &c. 3 Jac. I. cap. 26.
A species of Dissenters in Scotland, whose only difference from the Scotch established church is the choosing their own pastors. They were separated from the church in the year 1752, occasioned by Mr. Thomas Gillespie being deposed for refusing to assist at the admission of a minister to a parish who were unwilling to receive him. When Mr. Gillespie was deprived of his parish, he removed to Dumferline, and preached there to a congregation who were attached to him, and vehemently opposed the law of patronage. Being excluded from the communion of the church, he, with two or three other ministers, constituted themselves into a presbytery, called the Presbytery of Relief; willing to afford relief to all "who adhered to the constitution of their church of Scotland, as exhibited in her creeds, canons, confessions, and forms of worship." They are unwilling, it is said, to be reckoned seceders. Their licentiates are educated under the established church professors, whose certificates they acknowledge. Many of their people receive the Lord's supper with equal readiness in the established church as in their own. The relief synod consists of about sixty congregations, and about 36,000 persons.
Is a Latin word, derived, according to Cicero,
from rilegere, "to re-consider;" but according to Servius and most
modern grammarians, from religare, "to bind fast." If the Ciceronian
etymology be the true one, the word religion will denote the diligent study
whatever pertains to the worship of God; but, according to the other
derivation, it denotes that obligation which we feel on our minds from the relation
in which we stand to some superior power. The word is sometimes used as
synonymous with sect; but, in a practical sense, it is generally considered as
the same with godliness, or a life devoted to the worship and fear of God. Dr.
Doddridge thus defines it: "Religion consists in the resolution of the
will for God, and in a constant care to avoid whatever we are persuaded he
would disapprove, to despatch the work he has assigned us in life, and to
promote his glory in the happiness of mankind." See GODLINESS.) The
foundation of all religion rests on the belief of the existence of God. As we
have, however, already considered the evidences of the divine existence, they
need not be enumerated again in this place; the reader will find them under the
article EXISTENCE OF GOD.
Religion has been divided into natural and
revealed. By natural religion is meant that knowledge, veneration, and love of
God, and the practice of those duties to him, our fellow-creatures, and
ourselves, which are discoverable by the right exercise of our rational
faculties, from considering the nature and perfections of God, and our relation
to him and to one another. By revealed religion is understood that discovery
which he has made to us of his mind and will in the Holy Scriptures. As it
respects natural religion, some doubt whether, properly speaking, there can be
any such thing; since, through the fall, reason is so depraved, that man
without revelation is under the greatest darkness and misery, as may be easily
seen by considering the history of those nations who are destitute of it, and
who are given up to barbarism, ignorance, cruelty, and evils of every kind. So
far as this, however, may be observed, that the light of nature can give us no
proper ideas of God, nor inform us what worship will be acceptable to him. It
does not tell us how man became a fallen sinful creature, as he is, nor how he
can be recovered. It affords us no intelligence as to the immortality of the
soul, the resurrection of the body, and a future state of happiness and misery.
The apostle, indeed, observes, that the Gentiles have the law written on their
hearts, and are a law unto themselves; yet the greatest moralists among them
were so blinded as to be guilty of, and actually to countenance the greatest
vices. Such a system, therefore, it is supposed, can hardly be said to be
religious which leaves man in such uncertainty, ignorance, and impiety. (See
REVELATION.) On the other side it is observed, "that, though it is in the
highest degree probable that the parents of mankind received all their
theological knowledge by supernatural means, it is yet obvious that some parts
of that knowledge must have been capable of a proof purely rational, otherwise
not a single religious truth could have been conveyed through the succeeding
generations of the human race but by the immediate inspiration of each
individual. We, indeed, admit may propositions as certainly true, upon the sole
authority of the Jewish and Christian Scriptures, and we receive these
Scriptures with gratitude as the lively oracles of God; but it is self-evident
that we could not do either the one or the other, were we not convinced by
natural means that God exists; that he is a being of goodness, justice, and
power; and that he inspired with divine wisdom the penmen of these sacred
volumes. Now, though it is very possible that no man, or body of men, left to
themselves from infancy in a desert world, would ever have made a theological
discovery, yet, whatever propositions relating to the being and attributes of
the First Cause and duty of man, can be demonstrated by human reason,
independent of written revelation, may be called natural theology, and are of
the utmost importance, as being to us the first principles of all religion.
Natural theology, in this sense of the word, is the foundation of the Christian
revelation; for, without a previous knowledge of it, we could have no evidence
that the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments are indeed the word of
God."
The religions which exist in the world have been
generally divided into four, the Pagan, the Jewish, the Mahometan, and the
Christian; to which articles the reader is referred. The various duties of the
Christian religion also are stated in their different places. See also, as
connected with this article, the articles INSPIRATION, REVELATION, and
THEOLOGY, and books there recommended.
In a general sense, something that relates to religion. It is also used for a person engaged by solemn vows to the monastic life; or a person shut up in a monastery, to lead a life of devotion and austerity under some rule or institution. The male religious are called monks and friars; the females, nuns and canonesses.
Or RELIYAN UNIVERSALISTS, the followers of Mr. James Relly. He first commenced his ministerial character in connection with Mr. Whitfield, and was received with great popularity. Upon a change of his views, he encountered reproach, and was pronounced by many as an enemy to godliness. He believed that Christ as Mediator was so united to mankind, that his actions were theirs, his obedience and sufferings theirs; and, consequently, that he has as fully restored the whole human race to the divine favour, as if all had obeyed and suffered in their own persons; and upon this persuasion he preached a finished salvation, called by the apostle Jude, "The common salvation." Many of his followers are removed to the world of spirits, but a branch still survives, and meets at the chapel in Windmill-street, Moorfields, London; where there are different brethren who speak. They are not observers of ordinances, such as water-baptism and the sacrament; professing to believe only in one baptism, which they call an immersion of the mind or conscience into truth by the teaching of the Spirit of God; and by the same Spirit they are enabled to feed on Christ as the bread of life, professing that in and with Jesus they possess all things. They inculcate and maintain good works for necessary purposes; but contend that the principal and only works which ought to be attended to, is the doing real good without religious ostentation; that to relieve the miseries and distresses of mankind according to our ability, is doing more real good than the superstitious observance of religious ceremonies. In general they appear to believe that there will be a resurrection to life, and a resurrection to condemnation; that believers only will be among the former, who as first fruits, and kings and priests, will have part in the first resurrection, and shall reign with Christ in his kingdom of the millennium; that unbelievers who are after raised, must wait the manifestation of the Saviour of the world, under that condemnation of conscience which a mind in darkness and wrath must necessarily feel; that believers, called kings and priests, will be made the medium of communication to their condemned brethren; and like Joseph to his brethren, though he spoke roughly to them, in reality overflowed with affection and tenderness; that ultimately every knee shall bow, and every tongue confess that in the Lord they have righteousness and strength; and thus every enemy shall be subdued to the kingdom and glory of the Great Mediator. A Mr. Murray belonging to this society emigrated to America, and preached these sentiments at Boston and elsewhere. Mr. Relly published several works, the principal of which were, "Union." "The Trial of Spirits." "Christian Liberty." "One Baptism." "The Salt of Sacrifice." "Antichrist Resisted." "Letters on Universal Salvation." " The Cherubimical Mystery."
See LAW; and article JUSTIFICATION.
A title given to the Arminians, by reason of the remonstrance which, in 1610, they made to the states of Holland against the sentence of the Synod of Dort, which condemned them as heretics. Episcopius and Grotius were at the head of the Remonstrants, whose principles were first openly patronised in England by archbishop Laud. In Holland, the Calvinists presented an address in opposition to the remonstrance of the Arminians, and called it a counter-remonstrance. See ARMINIANS and DORT.
Uneasiness occasioned by a consciousness of guilt. When it is blended with the fear of punishment, and rises to despair, it constitutes the supreme wretchedness of the mind.
In general, is sorrow for any thing past. In
theology it signifies that sorrow for sin which produces newness of life. The
Greek word most frequently used in the New Testament for repentance properly
denotes an afterthought, or the soul recollecting its own actings; and that in
such a manner as to produce sorrow in the review, and a desire of amendment.
Another word also is used which signifies anxiety or uneasiness upon the
consideration of what is done. There are, however, various kinds or repentance;
as, 1. A natural repentance, or what is merely the effect of natural
conscience.--2. A national repentance, such as the Jews in Babylon were called
unto; to which temporal blessings were promised, Ezek. xviii. 30.--3. An External
repentance, or an outward humiliation for sin, as in the case of Ahab.--4. A
hypocritical repentance, as represented in Ephraim, Hos. vii. 16.--5. A legal
repentance, which is a mere work of the law, and the effect of convictions of
sin by it which in time wear off, and come to nothing.--6. an evangelical
repentance, which consists in conviction of sin; sorrow for it; confession of
it; hatred to it; and renunciation of it. A legal and evangelical repentance
are distinguished thus: 1. A legal repentance flows only from a sense of danger
and fear of wrath; but an evangelical repentance is a true mourning for sin,
and an earnest desire of deliverance from it.--2. A legal repentance flows from
unbelief, but evangelical is always the fruit and consequence of a saving
faith.--3. A legal repentance flows from an aversion to God and to his holy
law, but an evangelical from love to both.--4. A legal repentance ordinarily
flows from discouragement and despondency, but evangelical from encouraging
hope.--5. A legal repentance is temporary, but evangelical is the daily
exercise of the true Christian.--6. A legal repentance does at most produce
only a partial and external reformation, but an evangelical is a total change
of heart and life.
The author of true repentance is God, Acts v. 31.
The subjects of it are sinners, since none but those who have sinned can
repent. The means of repentance is the word, and the ministers of it; yet
sometimes consideration, sanctified afflictions, conversation, &c. have
been the instruments of repentance. The blessings connected with repentance
are, pardon, peace, and everlasting life, Acts xi. 18. The time of repentance
is the present life, Isaiah lv. 6. Eccl. ix. 50. the evidences of repentance
are, faith, humility, prayer, and obedience, Zech. xii. 10. The necessity of
repentance appears evident from the evil of sin; the misery it involves us in
here; the commands given us to repent in God's word; the promises made to the
penitent; and the absolute incapability of enjoying God here or hereafter
without it. See Dickinson's Letters, let. 9; Dr. Owen on the 130th Psalm;
Gill'sBody of Divinity, article Repentance; Ridgley's Body of Divinity,
question 76; Davies's Sermons, ser. 44. vol. iii.; Case's Sermons, ser. 4;
Whitefield's Sermons; Saurin's Sermons, ser. 9. vol. iii. Robinson's
translation; Scott's Treatise on Repentance.
The act of finding fault in opprobrious terms, or attempting to expose to infamy and disgrace. In whatever cause we engage, however disinterested our motives, however laudable our designs, reproach is what we must expect. But it becomes us not to retaliate, but to bear it patiently; and so to live, that every charge brought against us be groundless. If we be reproached for righteousness' sake, we have no reason to be ashamed nor to be afraid. All good men have thus suffered, Jesus Christ himself especially. We have the greatest promises of support. Besides, it has a tendency to humble us, detach us from the world, and excite in us a desire for that state of blessedness where all reproach shall be done away.
The act of abandoning, or state of being abandoned, to eternal destruction, and is applied to that decree or resolve which God has taken from all eternity to punish sinners who shall die in impenitence; in which sense it is opposed to election. See ELECTION and PREDESTINATION.
Blame or reprehension spoken to a person's face. It is distinguished from a reprimand thus. He who reproves another, points out his fault, and blames him. He who reprimands, affects to punish, and mortifies the offended. In giving reproof, the following rules may be observed: 1. We should not be forward in reproving our elders or superiors, but rather to remonstrate and supplicate for redress. What the ministers of God do in this kind, they do by special commission, as those that must give an account, 1 Tim. v. 1. Heb. xiii. 17.--2. We must not reprove rashly; there should be proof before reproof.--3. We should not reprove for slight matters for such faults or defects as proceed from natural frailty, from inadvertency, or mistake in matters of small consequence.--4. We should never reprove unseasonably, as to the time, the place, or the circumstances.--5. We should reprove mildly and sweetly, in the calmest manner, in the gentlest terms.--6. We should not affect to be reprehensive: perhaps there is no one considered more troublesome than he who delights in finding fault with others. In receiving reproof it may be observed, 1. That we should not reject it merely because it may come from those who are not exactly on a level with ourselves.--2. We should consider whether the reproof given be not actually deserved; and that, if the reprover knew all, whether the reproof would not be sharper than what it is.--3. Whether, if taken humbly and patiently, it will not be of great advantage to us.--4. That it is nothing but pride to suppose that we are never to be the subjects of reproof, since it is human to err.
Generally used in an ill sense, implying a determination to return an injury. Dr. Johnson observes, that resentment is an union of sorrow with malignity; a combination of a passion which all endeavour to avoid, with a passion which all concur to detest. The man who retires to meditate mischief, and to exasperate his own rage, whose thoughts are employed only on means of distress and contrivances of ruin, whose mind never pauses from the remembrance of his own sufferings, but to indulge some hope of enjoying the calamities of another, may justly be numbered among the most miserable of human beings; among those who are guilty; who have neither the gladness of prosperity, nor the calm of innocence.
A submission without discontent to the will of God. The obligations to this duty arise from, 1. The perfections of God, Deut, xxxii. 4.--2. The purposes of God, Eph. i. 11.--3. The commands of God, Heb. xii. 9.--4. The promises of God, 1 Pet. v. 7.--5. Our own interest, Hos. ii. 14, 15.--6. The prospect of eternal felicity, Heb. iv. 9. See articles AFFLICTION, DESPAIR, and PATIENCE; Worthington on Resignation; Brook's Mute Christian; Grosvenor's Mourner; and the books under AFFLICTION.
That act of justice by which we restore to our
neighbour whatever we have unjustly deprived him of, Exod. xxii. 1. Luke, xix.
8.
Moralists observe respecting restitution, 1. That
where it can be made in kind, or the injury can be certainly valued, we are to
restore the thing or the value.--2. We are bound to restore the thing with the
natural increase of it, that is, to satisfy for the loss sustained in the mean
time, and the gain hindered.--3. Where the thing cannot be restored, and the
value of it is not certain, we are to give reasonable satisfaction, according
to a middle estimation.--4. We are a least to give by way of restitution what
the law would give, for that is generally equal, and in most cases rather
favourable than rigorous.--5. A man is not only bound to restitution for the
injury he did, but for all that directly follows upon the injurious act. For
the first injury being wilful, we are supposed to will all that which follows
upon it. Tillotson's Sermons, ser. 170, 171; Chillingworth's Works, ser. 7.
A rising again from the state of the dead; generally applied to the resurrection of the last day. This doctrine is argued, 1. From the resurrection of Christ, 1 Cor. xv.--2. From the doctrines of grace, as union, election, redemption, &c.--3. From Scripture testimonies, Matt. xxii. 23, &c. Job, xix. 25, 27. Isaiah, xxvi. 19. Phil. ii. 20. 1 Cor. xv. Can. xii. 2. 1 Thess. iv. 14. Rev. xx. 13.--4. From the general judgment, which of course requires it. As to the nature of this resurrection, it will be, 1. General. Rev. xx. 12, 15. 2 Cor. v. 10.--2. Of the same body. It is true, indeed, that the body has not always the same particles, which are continually changing, but it has always the same constituent parts, which proves its identity; it is the same body that is born that dies, and the same body that dies that shall rise again; so that Mr. Locke's objection to the idea of the same body is a mere quibble.--3. The resurrection will be at the command of Christ, and by his power, John v. 28, 29.--4. Perhaps as to the manner it will be successive; the dead in Christ rising first, 1 Cor. xv. 23. 1 Thess. iv. 16. This doctrine is of great use and importance. It is one of the first principles of the doctrine of Christ; the whole Gospel stands or falls with it. It serves to enlarge our views of the divine perfections. It encourages our faith and trust in God under all the difficulties of life. It has a tendency to regulate all our affections and moderate out desires after earthly things. It supports the saints under the loss of near relations, and enables them to rejoice in the glorious prospect set before them. See Hody on the Resurrection; Pearson on the Creed; Lame Street Lect. ser. 10; Watt's Ontology; Young's Last Day; Locke on the Understanding,l. ii. c. 27; Warburton's Legation of Moses, vol. ii. p. 553, &c; Bishop Newton's Works, vol. iii. p. 676, 683.
Few articles are more important than this. It
deserves our particular attention, because it is the grand hinge on which
Christianity turns. Hence, says the apostle, he was delivered for our offences,
and raised again for our justification. Infidels, however, have disbelieved it,
but with what little reason we may easily see on considering the subject.
"If the body of Jesus Christ," says Saurin, "were not raised
from the dead, it must have been stolen away. But this theft is incredible. Who
committed it? The enemies of Jesus Christ? Would they have contributed to his
glory by countenancing a report of his resurrection? Would his disciples? It is
probable they would not, and it is next to certain they could not. How could
they have undertaken to remove the body? Frail and timorous creatures, people
who fled as soon as they saw him taken into custody; even Peter, the most
courageous, trembled at the voice of a servant girl, and three times denied
that he knew him. People of this character, would they have dared to resist the
authority of the governor? Would they have undertaken to oppose the
determination of the Sanhedrim, to force a guard, and to elude, or overcome,
soldiers armed and aware of danger? If Jesus Christ were not risen again (I
speak the language of unbelievers,) he had deceived his disciples with vain
hopes of his resurrection. How came the disciples not to discover the
imposture? Would they have hazarded themselves by undertaking an enterprise so
perilous in favour of a man who had so cruelly imposed on their credulity? But
were we to grant that they formed the design of removing the body, how could
they have executed it? How could soldiers armed, and on guard, suffer
themselves to be over-reached, by a few timorous people? Either, says St.
Augustine they were asleep or awake: if they were awake, why should they suffer
the body to be taken away? If asleep, how could they know that the disciples
took it away? How dare they then, depose that it was STOLEN.
The testimony of the apostles furnishes us with
arguments, and there are eight considerations which give the evidence
sufficient weight. 1. The nature of these witnesses. They were not men of
power, riches, eloquence, credit, to impose upon the world; they were poor and
mean.--2. The number of these witnesses. See 1 Cor. xv. Luke, xxiv. 34. Mark,
xvi. 14. Matt. xxviii 10. It is not likely that a collusion should have been
held among so many to support a lie, which would be of no utility to them.--3.
The facts themselves which they avow; not suppositions, distant events, or
events related by others, but real facts which they saw with their own eyes, 1
John, i.--4. The agreement of their evidence: they all deposed the same
thing.--5. Observe the tribunals before which they gave evidence: Jews and
heathens, philosophers and rabbins, courtiers and lawyers. If they had been
impostors, the fraud certainly would have been discovered.--6. The place in
which they bore their testimony. Not at a distance, where they might not easily
have been detected, if false, but at Jerusalem, in the synagogues, in the
pretorium.--7. The time of this testimony: not years after, but three days
after, they declared he was risen; yea, before their rage was quelled, while
Calvary was yet dyed with the blood they had spilt. If it had been a fraud, it
is not likely they would have come forward in such broad day-light, amidst so
much opposition.--8. Lastly, the motives which induced them to publish the
resurrection: not to gain fame, riches, glory, profit; no, they exposed
themselves to suffering and death, and proclaimed the truth from conviction of
its importance and certainty.
"Collect," says Saurin, "all these
proofs together; consider them in one point of view, and see how many
extravagant suppositions must be advanced, if the resurrection of our Saviour
be denied. It must be supposed that guards, who had been particularly cautioned
by their officers, sat down to sleep; and that, however, they deserved credit
when they said the body of Jesus Christ was stolen. It must be supposed that
men, who have been imposed on in the most odious and cruel manner in the world,
hazarded their dearest enjoyments for the glory of an impostor. It must be
supposed that ignorant and illiterate men, who had neither reputation, fortune,
nor eloquence, possessed the art of fascinating the eyes of all the church. It
must be supposed either that five hundred persons were all deprived of their
senses at a time, or that they were all deceived in the plainest matters of
fact; or that this multitude of false witnesses had found out the secret of
never contradicting themselves or one another, and of being always uniform in
their testimony. It must be supposed that the most expert courts of judicature
could not find out a shadow of contradiction in a palpable imposture. It must
be supposed that the apostles, sensible men in other cases, chose precisely
those places and those times which were most unfavourable to their views. It
must be supposed that millions madly suffered imprisonments, tortures, and
crucifixions, to spread an illusion. It must be supposed that ten thousand
miracles were wrought in favour of falsehood, or all these facts must be
denied; and then it must be supposed that the apostles were idiots; that the
enemies of Christianity were idiots; and that all the primitive Christians were
idiots."
The doctrine of the resurrection of Christ
affords us a variety of useful instructions. Here we see evidence of divine
power; prophecy accomplished; the character of Jesus established; his work
finished; and a future state proved. It is a ground of faith, the basis of
hope, a source of consolation, and a stimulus to obedience. See Saurin's
Sermons, ser. 8. vol. ii. Robinson's translation; Ditton and Wast on the
Resurrection; Cook's Illustration of the general evidence establishing the
reality of Christ's resurrection, p. 323. Ecc. Rev. vol. 4. but especially a
small but admirable Essay on the Resurrection of Christ by Mr. Dore. Bish.
Horsely.
The state of a person who quits a public station in order to be alone. Retirement is of great advantage to a wise man. To him "the hour of solitude is the hour of meditation. He communes with his own heart. He reviews the actions of his past life. He corrects what is amiss. He rejoices in what is right: and, wiser by experience, lays the plan of his future life. The great and the noble, the wise and the learned, the pious and the good, have been lovers of serious retirement. On this field the patriot forms his schemes, the philosopher pursues his discoveries, the saint improves himself in wisdom and goodness. Solitude is the hallowed ground which religion in every age has adopted as its own. There her sacred inspiration is felt, and her holy mysteries elevate the soul; there devotion lifts up the voice; there falls the tear of contrition; there the heart pours itself forth before him who made, and him who redeemed it. Apart from men, we live with nature, and converse with God." Logan's Sermons, vol. ii. ser. 2; Blair's Ser. ser. ix. vol. i.; Bates's Rural Philosophy; Brewster's Recluse; Zimmerman on Solitude.
The act of revealing or making a thing public that was before unknown; it is also used for the discoveries made by God to his prophets, and by them to the world; and more particularly for the books of the Old and New Testament. A revelation is, in the first place, possible. God may, for any thing we can certainly tell, think proper to make some discovery to his creatures which they knew not before. As he is a being of infinite power, we may be assured he cannot be at a loss for means to communicate his will, and that in such a manner as will sufficiently mark it his own.--2. It is desirable. For, whatever the light of nature could do for man before reason was depraved, it is evident that it has done little for man since. Though reason be necessary to examine the authority of divine revelation, yet, in the present state, it is incapable of giving us proper discoveries of God, the way of salvation, or of bringing us into a state of communion with God. It therefore follows.--3. That it is necessary. Without it we can attain to no certain knowledge of God, of Christ, of the Holy Ghost, of pardon, of justification, of sanctification, of happiness, of a future state of rewards and punishments.--4. No revelation, as Mr. Brown observes, relative to the redemption of mankind, could answer its respective ends, unless it were sufficiently marked with internal and external evidences. That the Bible hath internal evidence, is evident from the ideas it gives us of God's perfections, of the law of nature, of redemption, of the state of man, &c. As to its external evidence, it is easily seen by the characters of the men who composed it, the miracles wrought, its success, the fulfillment of its predictions, &c. (See SCRIPTURE.) 5. The contents of revelation are agreeable to reason. It is true there are some things above the reach of reason; but a revelation containing such things is no contradiction, as long as it is not against reason; for if every thing be rejected which cannot be exactly comprehended, we must become unbelievers at once of almost every thing around us. The doctrines, the institutions, the threatenings, the precepts, the promises, of the Bible, are every way reasonable. The matter, form, and exhibition of revelation are consonant with reason.--6. The revelation contained in our Bible is perfectly credible. It is an address to the reason, judgment, and affections of men. The Old Testament abounds with the finest specimens of history, sublimity, and interesting scenes of Providence. The facts of the New Testament are supported by undoubted evidence from enemies and friends. The attestations to the early existence of Christianity are numerous from Ignatius, Polycarp, Irenxus, Justin Martyr, and Tatian, who were Christians; and by Tactitus, Sueton, Serenus, Pliny, &c. who were Heathens. (See CHRISTIANITY.)--7. The revelations contained in our Bible are divinely inspired. The matter, the manner, the scope, the predictions, miracles, preservation, &c. &c. all prove this. (See INSPIRATION.)--8. Revelation is intended for universal benefit. It is a common objection to it, that hitherto it has been confined to few, and therefore could not come from God who is so benevolent; but this mode of arguing will equally hold good against the permission of sin, the inequalities of Providence, the dreadful evils and miseries of mankind which God could have prevented. It must be farther observed, that none deserve a revelation; that men have despised and abused the early revelations he gave to his people. This revelation, we have reason to believe, shall be made known to mankind. Already it is spreading its genuine influence. In the cold regions of the north, in the burning regions of the south, the Bible begins to be known; and, from the predictions it contains, we believe the glorious sun of revelation shall shine and illuminate the whole globe.--9. The effects of revelation which have already taken place in the world have been astonishing. In proportion as the Bible has been known, arts and sciences have been cultivated, peace and liberty have been diffused, civil and moral obligation have been attended to. Nations have emerged from ignorance and barbarity, whole communities have been morally reformed, unnatural practices abolished, and wise laws instituted. Its spiritual effects have been wonderful. Kings and peasants, conquerors and philosophers, the wise and the ignorant, the rich and the poor, have been brought to the foot of the cross; yea, millions have been enlightened, improved, reformed, and made happy by its influences. Let any one deny this, and he must be a hardened, ignorant infidel, indeed. Great is the truth, and must prevail. See Dr. Leland's Necessity of Revelation. "This work," says Mr. Ryland, "has had no answer, and I am persuaded it never will meet with a solid confutation." Halyburton against the Deists; Leland's View of Deistical Writers; Brown's compendium of Natural and Revealed Religion; Stillingfleet's Origines Sacrae, is, perhaps, one of the ablest defences of revealed religion ever written. Delany's Revelation examined with Candour; Arch. Campbell on Revelation; Ellis on Divine Things; Gale's Court of the Gentiles.
Means the return of injury for injury, or the infliction of pain on another in consequence of an injury received from him, farther than the just ends of reparation or punishment require. Revenge differs materially from resentment, which rises in the mind immediately on being injured; but revenge is a cool and deliberate wickedness, and is often executed years after the offence is given. By some it is considered as a perversion of anger. Anger, it is said, is a passion given to man for wise and proper purposes, but revenge is the corruption of anger; is unnatural, and therefore ought to be suppressed. It is observable that the proper object of anger is vice; but the object in general of revenge is man. It transfers the hatred due to the vice to the man, to whom it is not due. It is forbidden by the Scriptures, and is unbecoming the character and spirit of a peaceful follower of Jesus Christ. See ANGER.
Venerable; deserving awe and respect. It is a title of respect given to ecclesiastics. The religious abroad are called reverend fathers; and abbesses, prioresses, &c. reverend mothers. In England, bishops are right reverend, and archbishops most reverend; private clergymen, reverend. In France, before the revolution, their bishops, archbishops, and abbots, were all alike, most reverend. In Scotland, the clergy individually are, reverend; a synod is, very reverend; and the general assembly is, venerable. The Dissenters, also, in England have the title of reverend; though some of them suppose the term implies too much to be given to a mere creature, and that of God only it may be said with propriety, "Holy and reverend is his name," Psalm. cxi.4.
Awful regard; an act of obeisance; a submissive and humble deportment. See LORD'S NAME TAKEN IN VAIN.
Justice, holiness. The righteousness of God is the absolute and essential perfections of his nature; sometimes it is put for his justice. The righteousness of Christ denotes not only his absolute perfections, but is taken for his perfect obedience to the law, and suffering the penalty thereof in our stead. The righteousness of the law is that obedience which the law requires. The righteousness of faith is the righteousness of Christ as received by faith. The saints have a threefold righteousness. 1. The righteousness of their persons, as in Christ, his merit being imputed to them, and they accepted on the account thereof, 2 Cor. v. 21. Eph. v. 27. Isaiah, xiv. 24.--2. The righteousness of their principles being derived from, and formed according to the rule of right, Psalm cxix. 11.--3. The righteousness of their lives, produced by the sanctifying which no man shall see the Lord, Heb. xiii. 14. 1 Cor. vi. 11. See IMPUTATION, JUSTIFICATION, SANCTIFICATION; Dickinson's Letters, let. 12; Witherspoon's Essay on Imputed Righteousness; Hervey's Theron and Aspasio; Dr. Owen on Justification; Watts's Works, p. 532, vol. iii. oct. ed; Jenks on Submission to the Righteousness of God.
A solemn act of religion; an external ceremony. (See CEREMONY.) For the rites of the Jews, see Lowman's Hebrew Ritual; Spencer de Heb. Leg.; Durrell on the Mosaic Institution; Bishop Law's Theory of Religion, p. 89. 6th ed; Godwyn's Moses and Aaron; Edwards's Survey of all Religions, vol. i. ch. 9.; Jenning's Jewish Antiquities.
A book directing the order and manner to be observed in performing divine service in a particular church, diocese, or the like.
So called from John Rogers their chief leader. They appeared in New England about 1677. The principal distinguishing tenet of this denomination was, that worship performed the first day of the week was a species of idolatry which they ought to oppose. In consequence of this, they used a variety of measures to disturb those who were assembled for public worship on the Lord's day.
See CHURCH, and POPERY.
A bunch or string of beads on which the Roman Catholics count their prayers.
A name assumed by a sect or cabal of hermetical philosophers, who arose, as it has been said, or at least became first taken notice of in Germany, in the beginning of the fourteenth century. They bound themselves together by a solemn secret, which they all swore inviolably to preserve; and obliged themselves, at their admission into the order, to a strict observance of certain established rules. They pretended to know all sciences, and chiefly medicine; whereof they published themselves the restorers. They pretended to be masters of abundance of important secrets, and among others, that of the philosopher's stone; all which they affirmed to have received by tradition from the ancient Egyptians, Chaldeans, the Magi, the Gymnosophists. They have been distinguished by several names, accommodated to the several branches of their doctrine. Because they pretend to protract the period of human life by means of certain nostrums, and even to restore youth, they were called Immortales; as they pretended to know all things, they have been called Illuminati; and, because they have made no appearance for several years, unless the sect of Illuminati which lately started up on the continent derives its origin from them, they have been called the Invisible Brothers. Their society is frequently signed by the letters F. R. C. which some among them interpret Fratres Roris Cocti; it being pretended that the matter of the philosopher's stone is dew concorted, exhaled, &c.
See GREEK CHURCH.