Those who keep the seventh day as the sabbath. They are to be found principally, if not wholly among the Baptists. They object to the reasons which are generally alleged for keeping the first day; and assert, that the change from the seventh to the first was affected by Constantine on his conversion to Christianity. The three following propositions contain a summary of their principles as to this article of the sabbath, by which they stand distinguished. 1. That God hath required the observation of the seventh, or last day of every week, to be observed by mankind universally for the weekly sabbath.--2. That this command of God is perpetually binding on man till time shall be no more.--And, 3. That this sacred rest of the seventh-day sabbath is not (by divine authority) changed from the seventh and last to the first day of the week, or that the Scripture doth no where require the observation of any other day of the week for the weekly sabbath, but the seventh day only. They hold, in common with other Christians, the distinguishing doctrines of Christianity. There are two congregations of the Sabbatarians in London; one among the general Baptists, meeting in Mill Yard; the other among the particular Baptists, in Cripplegate. There are, also, a few to be found in different parts of the kingdom, and some it is said, in America. A tract, in support of this doctrine, was published by Mr. Cornthwaite, in 1740. See Evans's Sketch of the Denominations of the Christian World; and books under next article.
In the Hebrew language, signifies rest, and is
the seventh day of the week: a day appointed for religious duties, and a total
cessation from work, in commemoration of God's resting on the seventh day; and
likewise in memorial of the redemption of the Israelites from Egyptian bondage.
Concerning the time whem the sabbath was first
instituted there have been different opinions. Some have maintained that the
sanctification of the seventh day mentioned in Gen. ii. is only there spoken by
anticipation; and is to be understood of the sabbath afterwards enjoined in the
wilderness; and that the historian, writing after it was instituted, there
gives the reason of its institution; and this is supposed to be the case, as it
is never mentioned during the patriarchal age. But against this sentiment it is
urged, 1. That it cannot be easily supposed that the inspired penman would have
mentioned the sanctification of the seventh day among the primaeval transactions,
if such sanctification had not taken place until 2500 years afterwards.--2.
That considering Adam was restored to favour through a Mediator, and a
religious service instituted, which man was required to observe, in testimony
not only of his dependence on the Creator, but also of his faith and hope in
the promise, it seems reasonable that an institution so grand and solemn, and
so necessary to the observance of this service, should be then existent.--3.
That it is no proof against its existence because it is not mentioned in the
partriarchical age, no more than it is against its existence from Moses to the
end of David's reign, which was near 440 years.--4. That the Sabbath was
mentioned as a well known solemnity before the promulation of the law, Exodus,
xvi. 23. For the manner in which the Jews kept it, and the awful consequences
of neglecting it, we refer the reader to the Old Testament, Lev. xxvi. 34, 35.
Neh. xiii. 16, 18. Jer. xvii. 21. Ezek. xx. 16, 17. Numb. xv. 23-36.
Under the Christian dispensation, the sabbath is
altered from the seventh to the first day of the week. The arguments for the
change are these: 1. As the seventh day was observed by the Jewish church in
memory of the rest of God after the works of the creation, and their deliverance
from Pharaoh's tyranny, so the first day of the week has always been observed
by the Christian church in memory of Christ's resurrection.--2. Christ made
repeated visits to his disciples on that day.--3. It is called the Lord's day,
Rev. i. 10.--4. On this day the apostles were assembled, when the Holy Ghost
came down so visibly upon them, to qualify them for the conversion of the
world.--5. On this day we find St. Paul preaching at Troas, when the disciples
came to break bread.--6. The directions the apostles give to the Christians
plainly allude to their religious assemblies on the first day.--7. Pliny bears
witness of the first day of the week being kept as a festival, in honour of the
resurrection of Christ: and the primitive Christians kept it in the most solemn
manner.
These arguments, however, are not satisfactory to
some, and it must be confessed that there is no law in the New Testament
concerning the first day. However, it may be observed that it is not so much
the precise time that is universally binding, as that one day out of seven is
to be regarded. "As it is impossible," says Dr. Doddridge,
"certainly to determine which is the seventh day from the creation; and
as, in consequence of the spherical form of the earth, and the absurdity of the
scheme which supposes it one great plain, the change of place will necessarily
occasion some alteration in the time of the beginning and ending of any day in
question, it being always at the same time, somewhere or other, sun-rising and
sun-setting, noon and midnight, it seems very unreasonable to lay such a stress
upon the particular day as some do. It seems abundantly sufficient that there
be six days of labour and one of religious rest, which there will be upon the
Christian and the Jewish scheme."
As the sabbath is of divine institution, so it is
to be kept holy unto the Lord. Numerous have been the days appointed by men for
religious services; but these are not binding, because of human institution.
Not so the sabbath. Hence the fourth commandment is ushered in with a peculiar
emphasis--"Remember that thou keep holy the sabbath day." This
institution is wise as to its ends: That God may be worshipped; man instructed;
nations benefited; and families devoted to the service of God. It is lasting as
to its duration. The abolition of it would be unreasonable; unscriptural, Exod.
xxxi. 13; and every way disadvantageous to the body, to society, to the soul,
and even to the brute creation. It is, however, awfully violated by visiting,
feasting, indolence, buying and selling, working, woeldly amusements, and
travelling. "Look into the streets," says bishop Porteus, "on
the Lord's day, and see whether they convey the idea of a day of rest. Do not
our servants and our cattle seem to be almost as fully occupied on that day as
on any other? And, as if this was not a sufficient infringement of their
rights, we contrive by needless entertainments at home, and needless journeys
abroad, which are often by choice and inclination reserved for this very day, to
take up all the little remaining part of their leisure time. A sabbath day's
journey was among the Jews a proverbial expression for a very short one; among
us it can have no such meaning affixed to it. That day seems to be considered
by too many as set apart, by divine and human authority, for the purpose not
for rest, but of its direct opposite, the labour of travelling, thus adding one
day more of torment to those generous but wretched animals whose services they
hire; and who, being generally strained beyond their strength the other six
days of the week, have, of all creatures under heaven, the best and most
equitable claim to suspension of labour on the seventh."
These are evils greatly to be lamented; they are
an insult to God, an injury to ourselves, and an awful example to our servants,
our children, and our friends. To sanctify this day, we should consider it, 1.
A day of rest; not indeed, to exclude works of mercy and charity, but a
cessation from all labour and care.--2. As a day of remembrance; of creation,
preservation, redemption.--3. As a day of meditation and prayer in which we
should cultivate communion with God, Rev. i. 10.--4. As a day of public
worship, Acts. xx. 7. John xx. 19.--5. As a day of joy, Is. lvi. 2. Ps. cxviii.
24.--6. As a day of praise, Ps. cxvi. 12, 14.--7. As a day of anticipation;
looking forward to that holy, happy, and eternal sabbath that remains for the
people of God. See Chandler's two Sermons on the Sabbath; Wright on the
Sabbath; Watts's Hol. of Times and Places; Orton's Six Discourses on the Lord's
Day; Kennicott's Ser. and Dial. on the Sabbath; Bp. Porteus's Sermons, ser. 9.
vol. 1.; Watts's Sermons, ser. 57. vol. i.; S. Palmer's Apology for the
Christian Sabbath; Kennicott on the Oblations of Cain and Abel, p. 184, 185.
A sect in the third century that embraced the
opinions of Sabellius, a philosopher of Egypt, who openly taught that there is
but one person in the Godhead.
The Sabellians maintained that the Word and the
Holy Spirit are only virtues, emanations, or functions of the Deity; and held
that he who is in heaven is the Father of all things; that he descended into
the Virgin, became a child, and was born of her as a son; and that, having accomplished
the mystery of our salvation, he diffused himself on the apostles in tongues of
fire, and was then denominated the Holy Ghost. This they explained by
resembling God to the sun; the illuminated virtue or quality of which was the
Word, and its warming virtue the Holy Spirit. The Word, they taught, was
darted, like a divine ray, to accomplish the work of redemption; and that,
being reascended to heaven, the influences of the Father were communicated
after a like manner to the apostles.
A denomination in the fourth century, so called, because they always went clothed in sackcloth, and affected a great deal of austerity and penance.
Is derived from the Latinword sacramentum, which signifies an oath, particularly the oath taken by soldiers to be true to their country and general.--The word was adopted by the writers of the Latin church, to denote those ordinances of religion by which Christians came under an obligation of obedience to God, and which obligation, they supposed, was equally sacred with that of an oath. (See VOW.) Of sacraments, in this sense of the word, Protestant churches admit of but two; and it is not easy to conceive how a greater number can be made out from Scripture, if the definition of a sacrament be just which is given by the church of England. By that church, the meaning of the word sacrament is declared to be "an outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual grace given unto us, ordained by Christ himself, as a means whereby we receive the same, and a pledge to assure us thereof."--Accorcing to this definition, baptism and the Lord's supper are certainly sacraments, for each consists of an outward and visible sign of what is believed to be an inward and spiritual grace, both were ordained by Christ himself, and in the reception of each does the Christian solemnly devote himself to the service of his divine Master. (See BAPTISM, and LORD'S SUPPER.) The Romanists, however, add to this number confirmation, penance, extreme unction, ordination, and marriage, holding in all seven sacraments. (See POPERY.) Numerous, however, as the sacraments of the Romish church are, a sect of Christians sprung up in England, early in the last century, who increased their number. The founder of this sect was a Dr. Deacon. According to these men, every rite and every phrase, in the book called the Apostolical Constitutions, were certainly in use among the apostles themselves. Still, however, they make a distinction between the greater and the lesser sacraments. The greater sacraments are only two, baptism and the Lord's supper. The lesser are no fewer than ten, viz. five belonging to baptism, exorcism, anointing with oil, the white garment, a taste of milk and honey, and anointing with chrism, or ointment. The other five are, the sign of the cross, imposition of hands, unction of the sick, holy orders and matrimony. This sect, however, if not extinguished, is supposed to be in its last wane. Its founder published, in 1748, his full, true, and comprehensive view of Christianity, in two catechisms, octavo.
A general name given for all such as have held erroneous opinions respecting the Lord's supper. The term is chiefly applied among Catholics, by way of reproach to the Lutherans, Calvinists, and other Protestants.
An offering made to God on an altar, by means of
a regular minister: as an acknowledgment of his power, and a payment of homage.
Sacrifices (though the term is sometimes used to comprehend all the offerings
made to God, or in any way devoted to his service and honour) differ from mere
oblations in this, that in a sacrifice there is a real destruction or change of
the thing offered; whereas an oblation is only a simple offering or gift,
without any such change at all: thus, all sorts of tithes, and first fruits,
and whatever of men's worldly substance in consecrated to God for the support
of his worship and the maintenance of his ministers, are offerings, or
oblations; and these, under the Jewish law, were either of living creatures, or
other things; but sacrifices, in the more peculiar sense of the term, were
either wholly or in part consumed by fire. They have, by divines, been divided
into bloody and unbloody. Bloody sacrifices were made of living creatures;
unbloody, of the fruits of the earth. They have also been divided into
expiatory, impetratory, and eucharistical. The first kind were offered to
obtain of God the forgiveness of sins; the second, to procure some favour; and
the third, to express thankfulness for favours already received. Under one or other
of these heads may all sacrifices be arranged, though we are told that the
Egyptians had six hundred and sixty-six different kinds; a number surpassing
all credibility. Various have been the opinions of the learned concerning the
origin of sacrifices. Some suppose that they had their origin in superstition,
and were merely the inventions of men; others, that they originated in the
natural sentiments of the human heart; others imagine that God in order to
prevent their being offered to idols, introduced them into his service, though
he did not approve of them as good in themselves, or as proper rites of
worship. "But that animal sacrifices," says a learned author,
"were not instituted by man, seems extremely evident from the acknowledged
universality of the practice; from the wonderful sameness of the manner in
which the whole world offered these sacrifices; and from the expiation which
was constantly supposed to be effected by them.
"Now human reason, even among the most
strenuous opponents of the divine institutions, is allowed to be incapable of
pointing out the least natural fitness or congruity between blood and
atonement; between killing of God's creatures and the receiving a pardon for
the violation of God's laws. This consequence of sacrifices, when properly
offered, was the invariable opinion of the heathens, but not the whole of their
opinion in this matter; for they had also a traditionary belief among them,
that these animal sacrifices were not only expiations, but vicarious
commutations, and substituted satisfactions; and they called the animals so
offered the ransom of their souls.
"But if these notions are so remote from,
nay, so contrary to, any lesson that nature teaches, as they confessedly are,
how came the whole world to practise the rites founded upon them? It is certain
that the wisest Heathens, Pythagoras, Plato, Porphyry, and others, slighted the
religion of such sacrifices, and wondered how an institution so dismal (as it
appeared to them,) and so big with absurdity, could diffuse itself through the
world.--An advocate for the sufficiency of reason (Tindall) supposes the
absurdity prevailed by degrees; and the priests who shared with their gods, and
reserved the best bits for themselves, had the chief hand in this gainful superstition.
But, it may well be asked, who were the priests in the days of Cain and Abel?
Or, what gain could this superstition be to them, when the one gave away his
fruits, and the other his animal sacrifice, without being at liberty to taste
the least part of it? And it is worth remarking, that what this author wittily
calls the best bits and appropriates to the priests, appear to have been the
skin of the burnt-offering among the Jews, and the skin and feet among the
Heathens."
Dr. Spencer observes (De Leg. Heb. lib. iii.
&2.) that "sacrifices were looked upon as gifts, and that the general
opinion was, that gifts would have the same effect with God as with man; would
appease wrath, conciliate favour with the Deity, and testify the gratitude and
affection of the sacrificer; and that from this principle proceeded expiatory,
precatory, and eucharistical offerings. This is all that is pretended from
natural light to countenance this practice. But, how well soever the comparison
may be thought to hold between sacrifices and gifts, yet the opinion that
sacrifices would prevail with God must proceed from an observation that gifts
had prevailed with men; an observation this which Cain and Abel had little
opportunity of making. And if the coats of skin which God directed Adam to
make, were the remains of sacrifices, sure Adam could not sacrifice from this
observation, when there were no subjects in the world upon which he could make
these observations." (Kennicott's second Dissert. on the Offerings of Cain
and Abel, p. 201, &c.)
But the grand objection to the divine origin of
sacrifices is drawn from the Scriptures themselves, particularly the following
(Jer. vii. 22, 23.) "I spake not to your fathers, nor commanded them, at
the time that I brought them out of Egypt, concerning the matters of
burnt-offerings or sacrifices; but only this very thing commanded I them,
saying, Obey my voice, and I will be your God, and ye shall be my people."
The ingenious writer above referred to, accounts for this passage (p. 153 and
209.) by referring to the transaction at Marah, (Exod. xv. 23, 26,) at which
time God spake nothing concerning sacrifices: it certainly cannot be intended
to contradict the whole book of Leviticus, which is full of such appointments.
Another learned author, to account for the above, and other similar passages,
observes, "The Jews were diligent in performing the external services of
religion; in offering prayers, incense, sacrifices, oblations: but these
prayers were not offered with faith; and their oblations were made more
frequently to their idols than to the God of their fathers. The Hebrew idiom
ixcludes with a general negative, in a comparative sense, one of two objects
opposed to one another, thus: 'I will have mercy, and not sacrifice.' (Hosea, vi.
6.) For I spake not to your fathers, nor commanded them, concerning
burnt-offerings or sacrifices; but this thing I commanded them, saying, Obey my
voice.'" (Lowth on Isaiah, xliii. 22, 24.) The ingenious Dr. Doddridge
remarks, that, according to the genius of the Hebrew language, one thing seems
to be forbidden, and another commanded, when the meaning only is, that the
latter is generally to be preferred to the former. The text before us is a
remarkable instance of this; as likewise Joel, ii. 13. Matt. vi. 19, 20. John,
vi. 27. Luke, xii. 4, 5. and Col. iii. 2. And it is evident that Gen. xlv. 8.
Exod. xvi. 8. John, v. 30. John, vii. 19. and many other passages, are to be
expounded in the same comparative sense. (Paraph. on the New Test. sect. 59.)
So that the whole may be resolved into the apophthegm of the wise man. (Prov.
xxi. 3:) "To do justice and judgment is more acceptable to the Lord than
sacrifice." See Kennicott, above referred to; Edwards's History of
Redemption, p. 76. note: Outram de Sacrificiis; Warburton's Divine Leg. b. 9,
c. 2; Bishop Law's Theory of Rel. p. 50 to 54; Jennings's Jewish antiq. vol. i.
p. 26, 28; Fleury's Manners of the Israelites, part iv. ch. 4.; McEwen on the
Types.
The crime of profaning sacred things, or things devoted to God. The ancient church distinguished several sorts of sacrilege. The first was the diverting things appropriated to sacred purposes to ther uses.--2. Robbing the graves, or defacing and spoiling the monuments of the dead.--3. Those were considered as sacrilegious persons who delivered up their Bibles and the sacred utensils of the church to the Pagans, in the time of the Dioclesian persecution.--4. Profaning the sacraments, churches, altars, &c.--5. Molesting or hindering a clergyman in the performance of his office.--6. Depriving men of the use of the Scriptures or the sacraments, particularly the cup in the eucharist. The Romish casuists acknowledge all these but the last.
A famous sect among the Jews; so called, it is said, from their founder, Sadoc. It began in the time of Antigonus of Socho, president of the Sanhedrim at Jerusalem, and teacher of the law in the principal divinity school of that city. Antigonus having often, in his lectures, inculcated to his scholars that they ought not to serve God in a servile manner, but only out of filial love and fear, two of his scholars, Sadoc, and Baithus, thence inferred that there were no rewards at all after this life; and, therefore, separating from the school of their master, they thought there was no resurrection nor future state, neither angel nor spirit. Matt. xxii. 23. Acts, xxiii. 8. They seem to agree greatly with the Epicureans; differing however in this, that, though they denied a future state, yet they allowed the power of God to create the world; whereas the followers of Epicurus denied it. It is said also, that they rejected the Bible, except the Pentateuch; denied predestination; and taught, thet God had made man absolute master of all his actions, without assistance to good, or restraint from evil.
A person eminent for godliness. The word is generally applied by us to the apostles and other holy persons mentioned in the Scriptures: but the Romanists make its application much more extensive; as, according to them, all who are cannonized are made saints of a high degree. See CANONIZATION.
Means the safety or preservation of any thing that has been or is in danger; but it is more particularly used by us to denote our deliverance from sin and hell, and the final enjoyment of God in a future state, through the mediation of Jesus Christ. See articles ATONEMENT, PROPITIATION, RECONCILIATION, REDEMPTION and SANCTIFICATION.
An ancient sect among the Jews, whose origin was in the time of king Rehoboam, under whose reign the people of Israel were divided into two distinct kingdoms, that of Judah and that of Israel. The capital of the kingdom of Israel was Samaria, whence the Israelites took the name of Samaritans. Shalmaneser, king of Assyria, having besieged and taken Samaria, carried away all the people captives into the remotest parts of his dominions, and filled their place with Babylonians, Cutheans, and other idolaters. These, finding that they were exposed to wild beasts, desired that an Israelitish priest might be sent among them, to instruct them in the ancient religion and customs of the land they inhabited. This being granted them, they were delivered from the plague of wild beasts, and embraced the law of Moses, with which they mixed a great part of their ancient idolatry. Upon the return of the Jews from the Babylonish captivity, it appears that they had entirely quitted the worship of their idols. But though they were united in religion, they were not so in affection with the Jews; for they employed various calumnies and stratagems to hinder their rebuilding the temple of Jerusalem; and when they could not prevail, they erected a temple on Mount Gerizim, in opposition to that of Jerusalem. (See 2 Kings, xvii. Ezra, iv. v. vi.) The Samaritans at present are few in number, but pretend to great strictness in their observation of the law of Moses. They are said to be scattered; some at Damascus, some at Gaza, and some at Grand Cairo, in Egypt.
The collection of the five books of Moses, written in Samaritan or Phoenician characters; and, according to some, the ancient Hebrew characters which were in use before the captivity of Babylon. This Pentateuch was unknown in Europe till the seventeenth century, though quoted by Eusebius, Jerome, &c. Archbishop Usher was the first, or at least among the first, who procured it out of the East, to the number of five or six copies. Pietro della Valle purchased a very neat copy at Damascus, in 1616, for M. de Sansi, then ambassador of France at Constantinople, and afterwards bishop of St. Malo. This book was presented to the Fathers of the Oratory of St. Honore, where perhaps it is still preserved; and from which father Morinus, in 1632, printed the first Samaritan Pentateuch, which stands in Le Jay's Polyglot, but more correctly in Walton's from three Samaritan manuscripts, which belonged to Usher. the generality of divines hold, that the Samaritan Pentateuch, and that of the Jews, are one and the same work, written in the same language, only in different characters; and that the difference between the two text is owing to the inadvertency and inaccuracy of transcribers, or to the affectation of the Samaritans, by interpolating what might promote their interests and pretensions; that the two copies were originally the very same, and that the additions were afterwards inserted. And in this respect the Pentateuch of the Jews must be allowed the preference to that of the Samaritans; whereas others prefer the Samaritan as an original, preserved in the same character and the same condition in which Moses left it. The variations, additions, and transpositions which are found in the Samaritan Pentateuch, are carefully collected by Hottinger, and may be seen on confronting the two texts in the last volume of the English Polyglot, or by inspecting Kinnicott's edition of the Hebrew Bible, where the various readings are inserted. Some of these interpolations serve to illustrate the text; others are a kind of paraphrase, expressing at length what was only hinted at in the original; and others, again, such as favour their pretensions against the Jews; namely, the putting Gerizim for Ebal. Besides the Pentateuch in Phoenician characters, there is another in the language which was spoken at the time that Manasseh, first high priest of the temple of Gerizim, and son-in-law of Sanballat, governor of Samaria, under the king of Persia, took shelter among the Samaritans. The language of this last is a mixture of chaldee, Syriac, and Phoenician. It is called the Samaritan version, executed in favour of those who did not understand pure Hebrew; and is a literal translation, expressing the text word for word.
That work of God's grace, by which we are renewed after the image of God, set apart for his service, and enabled to die unto sin and live unto righteousness. It must be carefully considered in a two-fold light. 1. As an inestimable privilege granted us from God, 1 Thess. v. 23.--And, 2. As an all-comprehensive duty required of us by his holy word, 1 Thess. iv. 3. It is distinguished from justification thus: Justification changeth our state in law before God as a Judge; sanctification changeth our heart and life before him as our Father. Justification precedes, and sanctification follows, as the fruit and evidence of it. the surety-righteousness of christ imputed is our justifying righteousness; but the grace of God implanted is the matter of our sanctification. Justification removes the guilt of sin; sanctification the power of it. Justification delivers us from the avenging wrath of God, sanctification conforms us to his image. Yet justification and sanctification are inseparably connected in the promise of God, Rom. viii. 28 to 30; in the covenant of grace, Heb. viii. 10; in the doctrines and promises of the Gospel, Acts, v. 31; and in the experience of all true believers, 1 Cor. vi. 11. Sanctification is, 1. A divine work, and not to be begun or carried on by the power of man, Tit. iii. 5.--2. A progressive work, and not perfected at once, Prov. iv. 18.--3. An internal work, not consisting in external profession or bare morality, Psalms, li. 6.--4. A necessary work, necessary as to the evidence of our state, the honour of our characters, the usefulness of our lives, the happiness of our minds, and the internal enjoyment of God's presence in a future world, John, iii. 3. Heb. xii. 14. Sanctification evidences itself by, 1. A holy reverence, Nehem. v. 15.--2. Earnest regard, Lam. iii. 24.--3. Patient submission, Psal. xxxix. 9. Hence Archbishop Usher said of it, "Sanctification is nothing less than for a man to be brought to an entire resignation of his will to the will of God, and to live in the offering up of his soul continually in the flames of love, and as a whole burnt-offering to christ."--4. Increasing hatred to sin, Psal. cxix. 133.--5. Communion with God, Isaiah, xxvi. 8.--6. Delight in his word and ordinances, Psal. xxvii. 4.--7. Humility, Job, xlii. 5, 6.--8. Prayer, Psal. cix. 4.--9. Holy confidence, Psal. xxvii. 1.--10. Praise, Psal. ciii. 1.--11. Uniform obedience, John, xv. 8. See Marshall on Sanctification; Dr. Owen on the Holy Spirit; Witsii OEconomia, lib. iii. c. 12; Brown's Nat. and Rev. Theology, p. 447; Haweis's sermons, ser. 11, 12, 13; Scougal's Works. See articles HOLINESS, WORKS.
DIVINE,are those acts or laws of the Supreme Being which render any thing obligatory. See LAW.
A sect that originated in Scotland about the
year 1728; where it is, at this time, distinguished by the name of Glassites,
after its founder, Mr. John Glass, who was a minister of the established church
in that kingdom; but being charged with a design of subverting the national
covenant, and sapping the foundation of all national establishments, by
maintaining that the kingdom of Christ is not of this world, was expelled from
the synod by the church of Scotland. His sentiments are fully explained in a
tract, published at that time, entitled, "The Testimony of the King of
Martyrs," and preserved in the first volume of his works. In consequence
of Mr. Glass's expulsion, his adherents formed themselves into churches, conformable,
in their institution and discipline, to what they apprehended to be the plan of
the first churches recorded in the New Testament. Soon after the year 1755, Mr.
Robert Sandeman, an elder in one of these churches in Scotland, published a
series of letters addressed to Mr. Hervey, occasioned by his Theron and
Aspasio, in which he endeavours to show that his notion of faith is
contradictory to the Scripture account of it, and could only serve to lead men,
professedly holding the doctrines called Calvinistic, to establish their own
righteousness upon their frames, feelings, and acts of faith. In these letters
Mr. Sandeman attempts to prove that justifying faith is no more than a simple
belief of the truth, or the divine testimony passively received by the
understanding; and that this divine testimony carries in itself sufficient
ground of hope to every one who believes it, without any thing wrought in us,
or done by us, to give it a particular direction to ourselves.
Some of the popular preachers, as they were
called, had taught that it was of the essence of faith to believe that Christ
is ours; but Mr. Sandeman contended, that that which is believed in true faith
is the truth, and what would have been the truth though we had never believed
it. They dealt largely in calls and invitations to repent and believe in
Christ, in order to forgiveness; but he rejects the whole of them, maintaining
that the Gospel contained no offer but that of evidence, and that it was merely
a record or testimony to be credited. They had taught that though acceptance
with God, which included the forgiveness of sins, was merely on account of the
imputed righteousness of Christ, yet that none was accepted of God, nor
forgiven, till he repented of his sin, and received Christ as the only Saviour;
but he insists that there is acceptance with God through Christ for sinners,
while such, or before "any act, exercise, or exertion of their minds
whatsoever:" consequently before repentance; and that "a passive
belief of this quiets the guilty conscience, begets hope, and so lays the
foundation for love." It is by this passive belief of the truth that we,
according to Mr. Sandeman are justified, and that boasting is excluded. If any
act, exercise, or exertion of the mind, were necessary to our being accepted of
God, he conceives there would be whereof to glory; and justification by faith
could not be opposed, as it is in Rom. iv. 4, 6, to justification by works.
The authors to whom Mr. Sandeman refers, under
the title of "popular preachers," are Flavel, Boston, Guthrie, the
Erskines, &c. whom he has treated with acrimony and contempt. "I would
be far," says he, "from refusing even to the popular preachers
themselves what they so much grudge to others.--the benefit of the one instance
of a hardened sinner finding mercy at last; for I know of no sinners more
hardened, none greater destroyers of mankind, than they." There have not
been wanting writers, however, who have vindicated these ministers from his
invectives, and have endeavoured to show that Mr. Sandeman's notion of faith,
by excluding all exercise or concurrence of the will with the Gospel way of
salvation, confounds the faith of devils with that of Christians, and so is
calculated to deceive the souls of men. It has also been observed, that though
Mr. Sandeman admits of the acts of faith and love as fruits of believing the
truth, yet, "all his godliness consisting (as he acknowledges to Mr. Pike)
in love to that which first relieved him," it amounts to nothing but
self-love. And as self-love is a stranger to all those strong affections
expressed in the cxixth Psalm towards the law of God, he cannot admit of them
as the language of a good man, but applies the whole psalm to Christ, though
the person speaking acknowledges, that "before he was afflicted, he went
astray." Others have thought, that from the same principle it were easy to
account for the bitterness, pride, and contempt, which distinguish the system;
for self-love, say they, is consistent with the greatest aversion to all beings,
divine or human, excepting so far as they become subservient to us.
The chief opinion and practices in which this
sect differs from other Christians, are, their weekly administration of the
Lord's supper; their love-feasts, of which every member is not only allowed but
required to partake, and which consist of their dining together at each other's
houses in the interval between the morning and afternoon service. Their kiss of
charity used on this occasion at the admission of a new member, and at other
times when they deem it necessary and proper; their weekly collection before
the Lord's supper, for the support of the poor, and defraying other expenses;
mutual exhortation; abstinence from blood and things strangled; washing each
other's feet, when, as a deed of mercy, it might be an expression of love, the
precept concerning which, as well as other precepts, they understand literally:
community of goods, so far as that every one is to consider all that he has in
his possession and power, liable to the calls of the poor and the church; and
the unlawfulness of laying up treasures upon earth, by setting them apart for
any distant, future, and uncertain use. They allow of public and private
diversions, so far as they are unconnected with circumstances really sinful;
but apprehending a lot to be sacred, disapprove of lotteries, playing at cards,
dice, &c.
They maintain a plurality of elders, pastors, or
bishops, in each church; and the necessity of the presence of two elders in
every act of discipline, and at the administration of the Lord's supper.
In the choice of these elders, want of learning
and engagement in trade are no sufficient objection, if qualified according to
the instructions given to Timothy and Titus; but second marriages disqualify
for the office; and they are ordained by prayer and fasting, imposition of
hands, and giving the right hand of fellowship.
In their discipline they are strict and severe,
and think themselves obliged to separate from the communion and worship of all
such religious societies as appear to them not to profess the simple truth for
their only ground of hope, and who do not walk in obedience to it. We shall
only add, that in every transaction they esteem unanimity to be absolutely
necessary. See Glass's Testimony of the King of Martyrs; Sandeman's Letters on
Theron ant. Aspasio, letter 11; Backus's Discourses on Faith and its Influence,
p. 7-30; Adam's View of Religions; Bellamy's Nature and Glory of the Gospel,
Lon. ed. notes, p. 65-125; History of Dis. Church, p. 265, v. i.; Fuller's
Letters on Sandemanianism.
A council or assembly of persons sitting together; the name whereby the Jews called the great council of the nation, assembled in an apartment of the temple of Jerusalem, to determine the most important affairs both of church and state.
Wandering fanatics, or rather impostors, of the fourth century, who, instead of procuring a subsistence by honest industry, travelled through various cities and provinces, and gained a maintenance by fictitious miracles, by selling relics to the multitude, and other frauds of a like nature.
Is a Hebrew word, and signifies an adversary, or enemy, and is commonly applied in Scripture to the devil, or the chief of the fallen angels. "By collecting the passages," says Cruden, "where Satan, or the devil, is mentioned, it may be observed, that he fell from heaven with all his company; that God cast him down from thence for the punishment of his pride; that, by his envy and malice, sin, death, and all other evils, came into the world; that, by the permission of God, he exercises a sort of government in the world over his subordinates, over apostate angels like himself; that God makes use of him to prove good men and chastise bad ones; that he is a lying spirit in the mouth of false prophets, seducers, and heretics; that it is he, or some of his, that torment or possess men; that inspire them with evil designs, as he did David, when he suggested to him to number his people; to Judas, to betray his Lord and Master; and to Ananias and Sapphira, to conceal the price of their field. That he roves full of rage like a roaring lion, to tempt, to betray, to destroy, and to involve us in guilt and wickedness; that his power and malice are restrained within certain limits, and controlled by the will of God. In a word, that he is an enemy to God and man, and uses his utmost endeavours to rob God of his glory, and men of their souls." See articles ANGEL, DEVIL, TEMPTATION. More particularly as to the temptations of Satan. 1. "He adapts them to our temper and circumstances.--2. He chooses the fittest season to tempt: as youth, age, poverty, prosperity, public devotion, after happy manifestations; or when in a bad frame; after some signal source; when alone, or in the presence of the object; when unemployed and off our guard; in death.--3. He puts on the mask of religious friendship, 2 Cor. xi. 14. Matt. iv. 6. Luke, ix. 50. Gen. iii.--4. He manages temptation with the greatest subtlety. He asks but little at first; leaves for a season in order to renew his attack.--5. He leads men to sin with a hope of speedy repentance.--6. He raises suitable instruments, bad habits, relations, Gen. iii. Job, ii. 9, 10. See Gilpin on Temptation; Brooks on Satan's Devices; Bishop Porteus's Sermons, vol. ii. p. 63; Burgh's Crito. vol. i. ess. 3; vol. ii. ess. 4; Howe's Works, vol. ii. p. 360; Gurnall's Christian Armour.
A branch of the Messalians, who appeared about the year 390. It is said, among other things that they believed the devil to be extremely powerful, and that it was much wiser to respect and adore than to curse him.
In general, significes the act of giving complete or perfect pleasure. In the Christian system it denotes that which Christ did and suffered in order to satisfy divine justice, to secure the honours of the divine government, and thereby make an atonement for the sins of his people. Satisfation is distinguished from merit thus: The satisfaction of Christ consists in his answering the demands of the law on man which were consequent on the breach of it. These were answered by suffering its penalty. The merit of Christ consists in what he did to fulfil what the law demanded, before man sinned, which was obedience. The satisfaction of Christ is to free us from misery, and the Merit of Christ is to purchase happiness for us. See ATONEMENT and PROPITIATION. Also Dr. Owen on the Satisfaction of Christ; Gill's Body of Div. article Satisfacction; Stillingfleet on Satisfaction; Watts's Redeemer and Sanctifier, p. 28, 32; Hervey's Theron and Aspasio.
A denomination which arose about the year 115.
They derived their name from Saturnius of Antioch, one of the principal Gnostic
chiefs. He held the doctrine of two principles, whence proceeded all things;
the one, a wise and benevolent Deity, and the other, matter, a principle
essentially evil, and which he supposed acted under the superintendence of a
certain intelligence of a malignant nature.
The world and its inhabitants were, according to
the system of Saturnius, created by seven angels, which presided over the seven
planets. This work was carried on without the knowledge of the benevolent
Deity, and in opposition to the will of the material principle. The former,
however, beheld it with approbation, and honoured it with several marks of his
beneficence. He endowed with rational souls the beings who inhabited this new
system, to whom their creators had imparted nothing more than the animal life;
and, having divided the world into seven parts, he distributed them among the
seven angelic architects, one of whom was the God of the Jews, and reserved to
himself the supreme empire over all. To these creatures, whom the benevolent
principle had endowed with reasonable souls, and with dispositions that led to
goodness and virtue, and evil being, to maintain his empire, added another
kind, whom he formed of a wicked and malignant character: and hence the
differences we see among men. When the creatures of the world fell from their
allegiance to the supreme Deity, God sent from heaven into our globe a restorer
of order, whose name was Christ. This divine Conqueror came clothed with a
corporeal appearance, but not with a real body. He came to destroy the empire
of the material principle, and to point out to virtuous souls the way by which
they must return to God. This way is beset with difficulties and sufferings,
since those souls who propose returning to the Supreme Being must abstain from
wine, flesh, wedlock, and in short from every thing that tends to sensual
gratification or even bodily refreshment. See GNOSTICS.
A person who delivers from danger and misery.
Thus Jesus Christ is called the Saviour, as he delivers us from the greatest
evils, and brings us into the possession of the greatest good. See JESUS
CHRIST, LIBERTY, PROPITIATION, REDEMPTION.
Order of St. Saviour, a religious order of the
Romish church, founded by St. Bridget, about the year 1345; and so called from
its being pretended that our Saviour himself declared its constitution and
rules to the foundress.
A conference held at the Savoy, 1661, between the episcopal divines and the Presbyterians, in order to review the book of Common Prayer; but which was carried on the side of the Episcopalians. See Neale's Hist. of the Puritans, vol. ii. p. 601, quarto edit. or Introduction to Palmer's Nonconformists' Memorial.
Of FAITH, a declaration of the faith and order of the Independents, agreed upon by their elders and messengers in their meeting at the Savoy in the year 1658. This was re-printed in the year 1729. See Neale's Hist. of the Puritans, vol. ii. p. 507, quarto edit.
From "I consider, look about, or deliberate." properly signifies considerative and inquisitive; or one who is always weighing, reasons on one side or the other without ever deciding between them.--The word is applied to an ancient sect of philosophers founded by Pyrrho, who denied the real existence of all qualities in bodies, except those which are essential to primary atoms; and referred every thing else to the perceptions of the mind produced by external objects; in other words, to appearance and opinion. In modern times the word has been applied to Deists, or those who doubt of the truth and authenticity of the sacred Scriptures. One of the greatest sceptics in later times was Hume; he endeavoured to introduce metaphysics, history, ethics, and theology. He has been confuted, however, by the doctors, Reid, Campbell, Gregory, and Beattie. See INFIDELITY.
A denomination in the sixteenth century; so called from one Gasper Schewenkfeldt, a Silesian knight. He differed from Luther in the three following points. The first of these points related to the doctrine concerning the eucharist. Schewenkfeldt inverted the following words of Christ, This is my body: and insisted in their being thus understood. My body is this, i. e. such as this bread which is broken and consumed; a true and real food, which nourisheth, satisfieth, and delighteth the soul. My blood is this, that is, such its effects, as the wine which strengthens and refresheth the heart. Secondly, He denied that the eternal word which is committed to writing in the holy Scriptures was endowed with the power of healing, illuminating, and renewing the mind; and he ascribed this power to the internal word, which, according to his notion, was Christ himself. Thirdly, He would not allow Christ's human nature, in its exalted state, to be called a creature, or a created substance, as such a denomination appeared to him infinitely below its majestic dignity; united as it is in that glorious state with the divine essence.
From a rent, clift, fissure; in its general
acceptation it signifies division or separation; but is chiefly used in
speaking of separations happening from diversity of opinions among people of
the same religion and faith. All separations, however, must not, properly
speaking, be considered as schisms.
Schism, says Mr. Arch. Hall, is, properly, a
division among those who stand in one connection of fellowship: but where the
difference is carried so far, that the parties concerned entirely break up all
communion one with another, and go into distinct connections for obtaining the
general ends of that religious fellowship which they once did, but now do not
carry on and pursue with united endeavours, as one church joined in the bonds
of individual society; where this is the case, it is undeniable there is
something very different from schism: it is no longer a schism in, but a
separation from, the body. Dr. Campbell supposes that the word schism in
Scripture does not always signify open separation, but that men may be guilty
of schism by such an alienation of affection from their brethren as violates
the internal union subsisting in the hearts of Christians, though there be no
error in doctrine, nor separation from communion. See 1 Cor. iii. 3, 4. 1 Cor.
xii. 24-26.
The great schism of the West is that which
happened in the times of Clement VII. and Urban VI. which divided the church
for forty or fifty years, and was at length ended by the election of Martin V.
at the council of Constance.
The Romanists number thirty-four schisms in their
church: they bestow the name English schism on the reformation of religion in
this kingdom. Those of the church of England apply the term schism to the
separation of the Presbyterians, Independents, Anabaptists, and Methodists.
"The sin of schism," says the learned
Blackstone, "as such, is by no means the object of temporal coercion and
punishment.--If, through weakness of intellect, through misdirected piety,
through perverseness and acerbity of temper, or through a prospect of secular
advantage in herding with a party, men quarrel with the ecclesiatical
establishment, the civil magistrate has nothing to do with it; unless their
tenets and practice are such as threaten ruin or disturbance to the state. All
persecution for diversity of opinions, however ridiculous and absurd they may
be, is contrary to every principle of sound policy and civil freedom. The names
and subordination of the clergy; the posture of devotion, the materials and
colour of a minister's garment, the joining in a known or unknown form of
prayer, and other matters of the same kind, must be left to the option of every
man's private judgment." The following have been proposed as remedies for
schism. "1. Be disposed to support your brethren by all the friendly
attentions in your power, speaking justly of their preaching and character.
Never withhold these proofs of your brotherly love, unless they depart from the
doctrines or spirit of the Gospel.--2. Discountenance the silly reports you may
hear, to the injury of any of your brethren. Oppose backbiting and slander to
the utmost.--3. whenever any brother is sinking in the esteem of his flock
through their caprice, perverseness, or antinomianism, endeavour to hold up his
hands and his heart in his work.--4. Never espouse the part of the factious
schismatics, till you have heard your brother's account of their conduct.--5.
In cases of an open separation, do not preach for separatists till it be
evident that God is with them. Detest the thought of wounding a brother's
feelings through the contemptible influence of a party spirit; for through this
abominable principle, schisms are sure to be multiplied.--6. Let the symptoms
of disease in the patients, arouse the benevolent attention of the physicians.
Let them check the froward, humble the proud, and warn the unruly; and many a
schismatic distemper will receive timely cure.--7. Let elderly ministers and
tutors of academics pay more attention to these things, in proportion as the
disease may prevail; for much good may be accomplished by their
influence." See King on the Primitive Church, p. 152.; Hales and Henry on
Schism; Dr. Campbell's Prel. Disc. to the Gospels, part 3; Haweis's Appendix to
the first vol. of his Chruch History; Archibald Hall's View of a Gospel Church;
Dr. Owen's View of the Nature of Schism; Buck's Sermons, ser. 6. on Divisions.
See conclusion of the article NONCONFORMIST.
Is that part or species of divinity which clears and discusses questions by reason and argument; in which sense it stands, in some measure, opposed to positive divinity, which is founded on the authority of fathers, councils, &c. The school divinity is not fallen into contempt, and is scarcely regarded any where but in some of the universities, where they are still by their charters obliged to teach it.
A sect of men, in the twelfth, thirteenth, and
fourteenth centuries, who framed a new sort of divinity, called Scholastic
Theology. (See last article.) Their divinity was founded upon, and confirmed
by, the philosophy of Aristotle, and lay, says Dr. Gill, in contentions and
litigious disputations, in thorny questions and subtle distinctions. Their
whole scheme was chiefly directed to support Antichristianism; so that by their
means Popish darkness was the more increased, and Christian divinity almost
banished out of the world.
"Considerint them as to their metaphysical
researches," says an anonymous but excellent writer, "they fatigued
their readers in the pursuit of endless abstractions and distinctions; and
their design seems rather to have been accurately to arrange and define the
objects of thought than to explore the mental faculties themselves. The nature
of particular and universal ideas, time, space, infinity, together with the
mode of existence to be ascribed to the Supreme Being, chiefly engaged the
attention of the mightiest minds in the middle ages. Acute in the highest
degree, and endued with a wonderful patience of thinking they yet, by a
mistaken direction of their powers, wasted themselves in endless logomachies,
and displayed more of a teazing subtlety than of philosophical depth. They
chose rather to strike into the dark and intricate by-paths of metaphysical
science, than to pursue a career of useful discovery; and as their
disquisitions were neither adorned by taste, nor reared on a basis of extensive
knowledge, they gradually fell into neglect, when juster views in philosophy
made their appearance. Still they will remain a mighty monument of the utmost
which the mind of man can accomplish in the field of abstraction. If the
metaphysician does not find in the schoolmen the materials of his work, he will
preceive the study of their writings to be of excellent benefit in sharpening
his tools. they will aid his acuteness, though they may fail to enlarge his
knowledge."
Some of the most famous were, Damascene,
Lanfranc, P. Lombard, Alex. Hales, Bonaventure, Thomas Aquinas, Duns Scotus,
and Durandus. Gill's Body of Divinity, Preface; Elective Rev. for Dec. 1805; H.
More's Hints to a Young Princess, vol. ii. p. 267, 268.
One who treats any person or thing with contempt. "He deems," says Mr. Scott, "his own understanding equal to the discovery, investigation, and even comprehension, of every subject: he therefore rejects as false whatever he cannot account for, what he finds contrary to his preconceived sentiments, and what is out of the reach of his reason; and, indeed, all that tends to condemn his conduct, or expose his folly."
A sect of school divines and philosophers; thus called from their founder, J. Duns Scotus, a Scottish cordelier, who maintained the immaculate conception of the Virgin, or that she was born without original sin, in opposition to Thomas Aquinas and the Thomists.
This word has different significations in Scripture. 1. A clerk, or writer, or secretary, 2 Sam. viii. 17.--2. A commissary, or muster-master of the army, 2 Chron. xxvi. 11, 2 Kings, xxv. 19.--3. A man of learning, a doctor of the law, 1 Chron. xxvii. 32.
Is a word derived from the Latin scriptura, and
in its original sense is of the same import with writing, signifying "any
thing written." It is, however, commonly used to denote the writings of
the Old and New Testaments, which are called sometimes the Scriptures,
sometimes the sacred or holy Scriptures, and sometimes canonical Scriptures.
These books are called the Scriptures by way of eminence, as they are the most
important of all writings.--They are said to be holy or sacred on account of
the sacred doctrines which they teach; and they are termed canonical, because,
when their number and authenticity were ascertained, their names were inserted
in ecclesiastical canons, to distinguish them from other books, which, being of
no authority, were kept out of sight, and therefore styled apocryphal. See
APOCRYPHA.
Among other arguments for the divine authority of
the Scriptures, the following may be considered as worthy of our attention:
"1. The sacred penmen, the prophets and
apostles, were holy, excellent men, and would not--artless, illiterate men, and
therefore could not, lay the horrible scheme of deluding mankind. The hope of
gain did not influence them, for they were self-denying men, that left all to
follow a Master who had not where to lay his head; and whose grand initiating
maxim was, Except a man forsake all that he hath, he cannot be my
disciple.--They were so disinterested, that they secured nothing on earth but
hunger and nakedness, stocks and prisons, racks and tortures; which, indeed,
was all that they could or did expect, in consequence of Christ's express
declarations. Neither was a desire of honour the motive of their actions; for
their Lord himself was treated with the utmost contempt, and had more than once
assured them that they should certainly share the same fate: above working as
mechanics for a coarse maintenance; and so little desirous of human regard,
that they exposed to the world the meanness of their birth and occupations,
their great ignorance and scandalous falls. Add to this that they were so many,
and lived at such distance of time and place from each other, that, had they
been impostors, it would have been impracticable for them to contrive and carry
on a forgery without being detected. And, as they neither would nor could
deceive the world, so they either could nor would be deceived themselves; for
they were days, months, and years, eye and ear-witnesses of the things which
they relate; and, when they had not the fullest evidence of important facts,
they insisted upon new proofs, and even upon sensible demonstrations; as, for
instance, Thomas, in the matter of our Lord's resurrection, John xx. 25; and to
leave us no room to question their sincerity, most of them joyfully sealed the
truth of their doctrines with their own blood. Did so many and such marks of
veracity ever meet in any other authors?
"2. But even while they lived, they
confirmed their testimony by a variety of miracles wrought in divers places,
and for a number of years, sometimes before thousands of their enemies, as the
miracles of Christ and his disciples; sometimes before hundreds of thousands,
as those of Moses. (See MIRACLE.)
"3. Reason itself dictates, that nothing but
the plainest matter of fact could induce so many thousands of prejudiced and
persecuting Jews to embrace the humbling self-denying doctrine of the cross,
which they so much despised and abhorred. Nothing but the clearest evidence
arising from undoubted truth could make multitudes of lawless, luxurious
heathens receive, follow, and transmit to posterity, the doctrine and writings
of the apostles; expecially at a time when the vanity of their pretensions to
miracles and the gift of tongues, could be so easily discovered, had they been
impostors; and when the profession of Christianity exposed persons of all ranks
to the greatest contempt and most imminent danger.
"4. When the authenticity of the miracles
was attested by thousands of living witnesses, religious rites were instituted
and performed by hundreds of thousands, agreeable to Scripture injunctions, in
order to perpetuate that authenticity: and these solemn ceremonies have ever
since been kept up in all parts of the world; the Passover by the Jews, in
remembrance of Moses's miracles in Egypt; and the Eucharist by Christians, as a
memorial of Christ's death, and the miracles that accompanied it, some of which
are recorded by Phlegon the Trallian, an heathen historian.
"5. The Scriptures have not only the
external sanction of miracles, but the eternal stamp of the omniscient God by a
variety of prophecies, some of which have already been most exactly confirmed
by the event predicted. (See PROPHECY.)
"6. The scattered, despised people, the
Jews, the irreconcileable enemies of the Christians, keep with amazing care the
Old Testament, full of the prophetic history of Jesus Christ, and by that means
afford the world a striking proof that the New Testament is true; and
Christians, in their turn, show that the Old Testament is abundantly confirmed
and explained by the New. (See JEWS, &4)
"7. To say nothing of the harmony, venerable
antiquity, and wonderful preservation of those books, some of which are by far
the most ancient in the world; to pass over the inimitable simplicity and true
sublimity of their style; the testimony of the fathers and the primitive
Christians; they carry with them such characters of truth, as command the
respect of every unprejudiced reader.
"They open to us the mystery of the
creation; the nature of God, angels, and man; the immortality of the soul; the
end for which we were made; the origin and connexion of moral and natural evil;
the vanity of this world, and the glory of the next. There we see inspired
shepherds, tradesmen, and fishermen, surpassing as much the greatest
philosophers, as these did the herd of mankind, both in meekness of wisdom and
sublimity of doctrine.--There we admire the purest morality in the world,
agreeable to the dictates of sound reason, confirmed by the witness which God
has placed for himself in our breast, and exemplified in the lives of men of
like passions with ourselves.--There we discover a vein of ecclesiastical
history and theological truth consistently running through a collection of
sixty-six different books, wtitten by various authors, in different languages,
during the space of above 1500 years.--There we find, as in a deep and pure
spring, all the genuine drops and streams of spiritual knowledge which can
possibly be met within the largest libraries.--There the workings of the human
heart are described in a manner that demonstrate the inspiration of the
Searcher of hearts.--There we have a particular account of all our spiritual
maladies, with their various symptoms, and the method of a certain cure; a cure
that has been witnessed by multitudes of martyrs and departed saints, and is
now enjoyed by thousands of good men, who would account it an honour to seal
the truth of the Scriptures with their own blood.--There you meet with the
noblest strains of penitential and joyous devotion,adapted to the dispositions
and states of all travellers to Sion.--And there you read those awful
threatenings and cheering promises which are daily fulfilled in the consciences
of men, to the admiration of believers, and the astonishment of attentive
infidels.
"8. The wonderful efficacy of the Scriptures
is another proof that they are of God. When they are faithfully opened by his
ministers, and powerfully applied by his Spirit, they wound and heal, they kill
and make alive; they alarm the careless, direct the lost, support the tempted,
strengthen the weak, comfort mourners, and nourish pious souls.
"9. To conclude: It is exceedingly
remarkable, that the more humble and holy people are, the more they read,
admire, and value the Scriptures: and, on the contrary, the more
self-conceited, worldly-minded, and wicked, the more they neglect, despise, and
asperse them.
"As for the objections which are raised
against their perspicuity and consistency, those who are both pious and learned,
know that they are generally founded on prepossession, and the want of
understanding in spiritual things; or on our ignorance of several customs,
idioms, and circumstances, which were perfectly known when those books were
written. Frequently, also, the immaterial error arises merely from a wrong
punctuation, or a mistake of copiers, printers, or translators; as the daily
discoveries of pious critics, of ingenious confessions of unprejudiced
enquirers, abundantly prove."
To understand the Scriptures, says Dr. Campbell,
we should, 1. Get acquainted with each writer's style.--2. Inquire carefully
into the character, the situation, and the office of the writer; the time, the
place, the occasion of his writing; and the people for whose immediate use he originally
intended his work.--3. Consider the principal scope of the book, and the
particulars chiefly observable in the method by which the writer has purposed
to execute his design.--4. Where the phrase is obscure, the context must be
consulted. This, however, will not always answer.--5. If it do not, consider
whether the phrase be any of the writer's peculiarities: if so, it must be
inquired what is the acceptation in which he employs it in other places.--6. If
this be not sufficient, recourse should be had to the parallel passages, if
there be any such, in the other sacred writers.--7. If this throws no light,
consult the New Testament and the Septuagint, where the word may be used.--8.
If the term be only once used in Scripture, then recur to the ordinary
acceptation of the term in classical authors.--9. Sometimes reference may be
had to the fathers.--10. The ancient versions, as well as modern scholiasts,
annotators, and translators, may be consulted.--11. The analogy of faith, and
the etymology of the word, must be used with caution.
Above all, let the reader unite prayer with his
endeavours, that his understanding may be illuminated, and his heart impressed
with the great truths which the sacred Scriptures contain.
As to the public reading of the Scriptures, it
may be remarked, that this is a very laudable and necessary practice. "One
circumstance," as a writer observes, "why this should be attended to
in congregations is, that numbers of the hearers, in many places, cannot read
them themselves, and not a few of them never hear them read in the families
where they reside. It is strange that this has not long ago struck every person
of the least reflection in all our churches, and especially the ministers, as a
most conclusive and irresistible argument for the adoption of this practice.
"It surely would be better to abridge the
preaching and singing, and even the prayers, to one half of their length or
more, than to neglect the public reading of the Scriptures. Let these things,
therefore, be daly considered, together with the following reasons and
observations, and let the reader judge and determine the case, or the matter,
for himself.
"Remember that God no sooner caused any part
of his will, or word, to be written, than he also commanded the same to be
read, not only in the family, but also in the congregation, and that even when
all Israel were assembled together (the men, women, and children, and even the
strangers that were within their gates;) and the end was, that they might hear,
and that they might learn, and fear the Lord their God, and observe to do all
the words of his law, Deut. xxxi. 12.
"Afterward, when synagogues were erected in
the land of Israel, that the people might every Sabbath meet to worship God, it
is well known that the public reading of the Scripture was a main part of the
service there performed: so much so, that no less than three-fourths of the
time ws generally employed, it seems, in reading and expounding the Scriptures.
Even the prayers and songs used on those occasions appear to have been all
subservient to that particular and principal employment or service, the reading
of the law.
"This work, or practice, of reading the
Scripture in the congregation, is warranted, and recommended in the New Testament,
as well as in the Old. As Christians, it is fit and necessary that we should
first of all look unto Jesus, who is the author and finisher of our faith. His
example, as well as his precepts, is full of precious and most important
instruction; and it is a remarkable circumstance, which ought never to be
forgotten, that he began his public ministry, in the synagogue of Nazareth, by
reading a portion of Scripture out of the book of the prophet Isaiah; Luke, iv.
15.--19. This alone, one would think, might be deemed quite sufficient to
justify the practice among his disciples through all succeeding ages, and even
inspire them with zeal for its constant observance.
"The apostle Paul, in pointing out to
Timothy his ministerial duties, particularly mentions reading, 1 Tim. iv. 13.
Give attendance (says he) to reading, to exhortation, to doctrine, evidently
distinguishing reading as one of the public duties incumbent upon Timothy.
there can be no reason for separating these three, as if the former was only a
private duty, and the others public ones; the most natural and consistent idea
is, that they were all three public duties; and that the reading here spoken
of, was no other than the reading of the Scriptures in those Christian
assemblies where Timothy was concerned, and which the apostle would have him by
no means to neglect. If the public reading of the Scriptures was so necessary
and important in those religious assemblies which had Timothy for their
minister, how much more must it be in our assemblies, and even in those which
enjoy the labours of our most able and eminent ministers!"
On the subject of the Scriptures, we must refer
the reader to the articles BIBLE, CANON, INSPIRATION, PROPHECY, and REVELATION.
See also Brown's Introduction to his Bible; Dr. Campbell's Preliminary
Dissertations to his Transl. of the Gospels; Fletcher's Appeal; Simon's
Critical History of the Old and New Test.; Ostervald's Arguments of the Books
and Characters of the Old and New Test.; Cosins's Scholastic Hist. of the Canon
of Scrip.; Warden's System of Revealed Religion; Wells's Geography of the Old
and New Test.; The Use of Sacred History, especially as illustrating and
confirming the Doctrine of Revelation, by Dr. Jamieson; Dick on Inspiration;
Blackwell's Sacred Classics; Michael's Introduction to the New Test.; Melmoth's
Sublime and Beautiful of the Scriptures; Dwight's Dissertation on the Poetry,
History, and Eloquence of the Bible; Edwards on the Authority, Style, and
Perfection of Scripture; Stackhouse's History of the Bible; Kennicott's State
of the Hebrew Text.; Jones on the figurative Language of Scripture; and books
under articles BIBLE, COMMENTARY, CHRISTIANITY, and REVELATION.
A numerous body of Presbyterians in Scotland,
who have withdrawn from the communion of the established church.
In 1732, more than forty ministers presented an
address to the general assembly, specifying, in a variety of instances, what
they considered to be great defections from the established constitution of the
church, and craving a redress of these grievances. A petition to the same
effect, subscribed by several hundreds of elders and private Christians, was
offered at the same time; but the assembly refused a hearing to both, and
enacted, that the election of ministers to vacant charges, where an accepted
presentation did not take place, should be competent only to a conjunct meeting
of elders and heritors, being Protestants. To this act many objections were
made by numbers of ministers and private Christians. They asserted that more
than thirty to one in every parish were not possessed of landed property, and
were, on that account, deprived of what they deemed their natural right to
choose their own pastors. It was also said that this act was extremely
prejudicial to the honour and interest of the church, as well as to the
edification of the people; and, in fine, that it was directly contrary to the
appointment of Jesus Christ, and the practice of the apostles, when they filled
up the first vacancy in the apostolic college, and appointed the election of
deacons and elders in the primitive church. Many of those also who were thought
to be the best friends of the church expressed their fears, that this act would
have a tendency to overturn the ecclesiastical constitution which was
established at the revolution.
Mr. Ebenezer Erskine, minister at Stirling,
distinguished himself by a bold and determined opposition to the measures of
the assembly in 1732. Being at that time moderator of the synod of Perth and
Stirling, he opened the meeting at Perth with a sermon from Psalm cxviii. 22.
"The stone which the builders rejected, is become the head stone of the
corner." In the course of his sermon, he remonstrated with no small degree
of freedom against the act of the preceding assembly, with regard to the
settlement of ministers; and alleged that it was contrary to the word of God
and the established constitution of the church. A formal complaint was lodged against
him for uttering several offensive expressions in his sermon before the synod.
Many of the members declared that they heard him utter nothing but sound and
seasonable doctrine; but his accusers, insisting on their complaint, obtained
an appointment of committee of synod to collect what were called the offensive
expressions, and to lay them before the next diet in writing. This was done
accordingly; and Mr. Erskine gave in his answers to every article of the
complaint. After three day's warm reasoning on this affair, the synod, by a
majority of six, found him censurable; against which sentence he protested, and
appealed to the next general assembly. When the assembly met in May 1733, it
confirmed the sentence of the synod, and appointed Mr. Erskine to be rebuked
and admonished from the chair. Upon which he protested, that as the assembly
had found him censurable, and had rebuked him fro doing what he conceived to be
agreeable to the word of God and the standards of the church, he should be at
liberty to preach the same truths, and to testify against the same or similar
evils, on every proper occasion. To this protest Messrs. William Wilson,
minister at Perth, Alexander Moncrief, minister at Abernethy, and James Fisher,
minister at Kinclaven, gave in a written adherence, under the form of
instrument; and these four withdrew, intending to return to their respective
charges, and act agreeably to their protest whenever they should have an
opportunity. Had the affair rested here, there never would have been a
secession; but the assembly, resolving to carry the process, cited them by
their officer, to compear next day. They obeyed the citation; and a committee
was appointed to retire with them, in order to persuade them to withdraw their
protest. The committee having reported that they still adhered to their
protest, the assembly ordered them to appear before the commission in August
following, and retract their protest; and, if they should not comply and
testify their sorrow for their conduct, the commission was empowered to suspend
them from the exercise of their ministry, with certification that, if they
should act contrary to the said sentence, the commission should proceed to an
higher censure.
The commission met in August accordingly; and the
four ministers, still adhering to their protest, were suspended from the
exercise of their office, and cited to the next meeting of the commission in
November following. From this sentence several ministers and elders, members of
the commission, dissented. The commission met in November, and the suspended
ministers compeared. Addresses, representations, and letters from several
synods and presbyteries, relative to the business now before the commission,
were received and read. The synod of Dumfries, Murray, Ross, Angus and Mearns,
Perth and Stirling, craved that the commission would delay proceeding to a
higher censure. The synods of Galloway and Fife, as also the presbytery of
Dornoch, addressed the commission for lenity, tenderness, and forbearance
towards the suspended ministers; and the presbytery of Aberdeen represented,
that, in their judgment, the sentence of suspension inflicted on the aforesaid
ministers was too high, and that it was a stretch of ecclesiastical authority.
Many members of the commission reasoned in the same manner, and alleged, that
the act and sentence of last assembly did not obliged them to proceed to a
higher censure at this meeting of the commission. The question, however, was
put,--Proceed to a higher censure or not? and the votes being numbered, were
found equal on both sides: upon which Mr. John Goldie, the moderator, gave his
casting vote to proceed to a higher censure; which stands in their minutes in
these words:--"The commission did and hereby do loose the relation of Mr.
Ebenezer Erskine, minister at Stirling, Mr. William Wilson, minister at Perth,
Mr. Alexander Moncrief, minister at Abernethy, and Mr. James Fisher, minister
at Kinclaven, to their respective charge, and declare them no longer ministers
of this church; and do hereby prohibit all ministers of this church to employ
them, or any of them, in any ministerial function. And the commission do
declare the churches of the said ministers vacant from and after the date of
this sentence."
This sentence being intimated to them, they
protested that their ministerial office and relation to their respective
charges should be held as valid as if no such sentence had passed; and that
they were now obliged to make a secession from the prevailing party in the
ecclesiastical courts; and that it shall be lawful and warrantable for them to
preach the Gospel, and discharge every branch of the pastoral office, according
to the word of God, and the established principles of the church of Scotland.
Mr. Ralph Erskine, minister at Dunfermline, Mr. Thomas Mair, minister at Orwel,
Mr. John M'Laren, minister at Edinburgh, Mr. John Currie, minister at
Kinglassie, Mr. James Wardlaw, minister at Dunfermline, and Mr. Thomas Narin,
minister at Abbotshall, protested against the sentence of the commission, and
that it should be lawful for them to complain of it to any subsequent general
assembly of the church.
The secession properly commenced at this date.
And accordingly the ejected ministers declared in their protest, that they were
laid under the disagreeable necessity of seceding, not from the principles and
constitution of the church of Scotland, to which, they said, they steadfastly
adhered, but from the present church-courts, which had thrown them out from
ministerial communion. The assembly, however, which met in May 1734, did so far
modify the above snetence, that they empowered the synod of Perth and Stirling
to receive the ejected ministers into the communion of the church, and restore
them to their respective charges; but with this express direction, "that
the said synod should not take upon them to judge of the legality or formality
of the former procedure of the church judicatories in relation to this affair,
or either approve or censure the same." As this appointment neither condemned
the act of the preceding assembly, nor the conduct of the commission, the
seceding ministers considered it to be rather an act of grace than of justice;
and therefore, they said, they could not return to the church-courts upon this
ground; and they published to the world the reasons of their refusal, and the
terms upon which they were willing to return to the communion of the
established church. They now erected themselves into an ecclesiastical court,
which they called the Associated Presbytery, and preached occasionally to
numbers of the people who joined them in different parts of the country. They
also published what they called an Act, Declaration, and Testimony, to the
doctrine, worship, government, and discipline of the church of Scotland; and
against several instances, as they said, of defection from these, both in
former and in the present times. Some time after this, several ministers of the
established church joined them, and the Associated Presbytery now consisted of
eight ministers. But the general assembly which met in 1738, finding that the
number of Seceders was much increased, ordered the eight ministers to be served
with a libel, and to be cited to the next meeting of the assembly, in 1739.
They now appeared at the bar as a constituted presbytery, and, having formerly
declined the assembly's authority, they immediately withdrew. The assembly
which met next year, deposed them from the office of the ministry; which,
however, they continued to exercise in their respective congregations, who
still adhered to them, and erected meeting-houses, where they preached till
their death. Mr. James Fisher, the last survivor of them, was by a unanimous
call in 1741, translated from Kinclaven to Glasgow, where he continued in the
exercise of his ministry among a numerous congregation, respected by al ranks
in that large city, and died in 1775, much regretted by his people and friends.
In 1745, the seceding ministers were become so numerous, that they were erected
into three different presbyteries under one synod, when a very unprofitable
dispute divided them into two parties.
The burgess oath, in some of the royal boroughs
of Scotland, contains the following clause: "I profess and allow with my
heart the true religion presently professed within this realm, and authorised
by the laws thereof. I will abide at and defend the same to my life's end,
renouncing the Romish religion called Papistry." Messrs. Ebenezer and
Ralph Erskine, James Fisher, and others, affirmed that this clause was no way
contrary to the principles upon which the secession was formed, and that
therefore every seceder might lawfully swear it. Messrs. Alexander Moncrief,
Thomas Mair, Adam Gib, and others, contended, on the other hand, that the
swearing of the above clause was a virtual renunciation of their testimony; and
this controversy was so keenly agitated, that they split into two different
parties, and now meet in different synods. Those of them who assert the
lawfulness of swearing the burgess oath are called Burghers; and the other
party, who condemn it, are called Antiburgher Seceders. Each party claiming to
itself the lawful constitution of the Associate Synod, the Antiburghers, after
several previous steps, excommunicated the Burghers, on the ground of their
sin, and of their contumacy in it. This rupture took place in 1747, since which
period no attempts to effect a reunion have been successful. They remain under
the jurisdiction of different synods, and hold separate communion, although
much of their former hostility has been laid aside. The Antiburghers consider
the Burghers as too lax, and not sufficiently steadfast to their testimony. The
Burghers on the other hand, contend that the Antiburghers are too rigid, in
that they have introduced new terms of communion into the society.
What follows in this article is a father account
of those who are commonly called the Burgher Seceders. As there were among
them, from the commencement of their secessions, several students who had been
educated at one or other of the universities, they appointed one of their
ministers to give lectures in theology, and train up candidates for the
ministry.
Where a congregation is very numerous, as in
Stirling, Dunfermline, and Perth, it is formed into a collegiate charge, and
provided with two ministers. They are erected into six different presbyteries,
united in one general synod, which commonly meets at Edinburgh in May and
September. they have also a synod in Ireland, composed of three or four
different presbyteries. They are legally tolerated in Ireland; and government,
some years ago, granted 500l. per annum, and of late an additional 500l. which,
when divided among them, affords to each minister about 20l. over and above the
stipend which he receives from his hearers. These have, besides, a presbytery
in Nova Scotia; and, some years ago, it is said, that the Burgher and the
Antiburgher ministers residing in the United States formed a coalition, and
joined in a general synod, which they call the Synod of New York and
Pennsylvania. They all preach the doctrines contained in the Westminster
Confession of Faith, and Catechisms, as they believe these to be founded on the
sacred Scriptures. They catechise their hearers publicly, and visit them from
house to house once every year. They will not give the Lord's supper to those
who are ignorant of the principles of the Gospel, nor to such as are scandalous
and immoral in their lives. They condemn private baptism; nor will they admit
those who are grossly ignorant and profane to be sponsors for their children. Believing
that the people have a natural right to choose their own pastors, the
settlement of their ministers always proceeds upon a popular election; and the
candidate, who is elected by the majority, is ordained among them. Convinced
that the charge of souls is a trust of the greatest importance, they carefully
watch over the morals of their students, and direct them to such course of
reading and study as they judge most proper to qualify them for the profitable
discharge of the pastoral duties. At the ordination of their ministers, they
use a formula of the same kind with that of the established church, which their
ministers are bound to subscribe when called to it; and if any of them teach
doctrines contrary to the Scriptures, or the Westminster Confession of Faith,
they are sure of being thrown out of their communion. By this means, uniformity
of sentiment is preserved among them; nor has any of their ministers, excepting
one, been prosecuted for error in doctrine since the commencement of their
secession.
They believe that the holy Scriptures are the
sole criterion of truth, and the only rule to direct mankind to glorify and
enjoy God, the chief and eternal good; and that "the supreme Judge, by
which all controversies of religion are to be determined, and all the decrees
of councils, opinions of ancient writers, doctrines of men and private spirits,
are to be examined, and in whose sentence we are to rest, can be no other but
the Holy Spirit speaking in the Scriptures." They are fully persuaded,
however, that the standards of public authority in the church of Scotland
exhibit a just and consistent view of the meaning and design of the holy
Scriptures with regard to doctrine, worship, government, and discipline; and
they so far differ from the dissenters in England, in that they hold these
standards to be not only articles of peace and a test of orthodoxy, but as a
bond of union and fellowship. They consider a simple declaration of adherence
to the Scriptures as too equivocal a proof of unity in sentiment, because
Arians,
Socinians, and Arminians, make such a confession of their faith, while they
retain sentiments which they (the Seceders) apprehend are subversive of the
great doctines of the Gospel. They believe that Jesus Christ is the only King
and Head of the church, which is his body; that it is his sole prerogative to
enact laws for the government of his kingdom, which is not of this world; and
that the church is not possessed of a legislative, but only of an executive
power, to be exercised in explaining and applying to their proper objects and
end those laws which Christ hath published in the Scriptures. Those doctrines
which they teach relative to faith and practice are exhibited at great length
in an Explanation of the Westminster Assembly's Shorter Catechism, by way of
question and answer, in two volumes, composed chiefly by Mr. James Fisher, late
of Glasgow, and published by desire of their synod.
For these fifty years past, the grounds of their
secession, they allege, have been greatly enlarged by the public
administrations of the established church, and particularly by the uniform
execution of the law respecting patronage, which, they say, has obliged many
thousands of private Christians to withdraw from the parish churches, and join
their society.
In most of their congregations, they celebrate
the Lord's supper twice in the year; and they catechise their young people
concerning their knowledge of the principles of religion previously to their
admission to that sacrament.--When any of them fall into the sin of fornication
or adultery, the scandal is regularly purged according to the form of process
in the established church; and those of the delinquents who do not submit to
adequate censure are publicly declared to be fugitives from discipline, and are
expelled the society. they never accept a sum of money as a commutation for the
offence. They condemn all clandestine and irregular marriages; nor will they
marry any persons unless they have been proclaimed in the parish church on two
different Lord's days at least.
The constitution of the Antiburgher church
differs very little from that of the Burghers. The supreme court among them is
designated The General Associate Synod, having under its jurisdiction three
provincial synods in Scotland and one in Ireland. They, as well as the Burgher
Seceders, have a professor of theology, whose lectures every candidate for the
office of a preacher is obliged to attend.
A collective term, comprehending all such as follow the doctrines and opinions of some divine, philosopher, &c. The word sect, says Dr. Campbell, (Prelim. Diss.) among the Jews, was not in its application entirely coincident with the same term as applied by Christians to the subdivisions subsisting among themselves. We, if I mistake not, invariably use it of those who form separate communions, and do not associate with one another in religious worship and ceremonies. Thus we call Papists, Lutherans, Calvinists, different sects, not so much on account of their differences in opinion, as because they have established to themselves different fraternities, to which, in what regards public worship, they confine themselves; the several denominations above-mentioned having no inter-community with one another in sacred matters. High church and low church we call only parties, because they have not formed separate communions. Great and known differences in opinion, when followed by no external breach in the society, are not considered with us as constituting distinct sects, though their differences in opinion may give rise to mutual aversion. Now, in the Jewish sects (if we except the Samaritans,) there were no separate communities errected. The same temple, and the same synagogues, were attended alike by Pharisees and by Sadducees: nay, there were often of both denominations in the Sanhedrim, and even in the priesthood.--Another difference was also, that the name of the sect was not applied to all the people who adopted the same opinions, but solely to the men of eminence among them who were considered as the leaders of the party.
See CLERGY.
A denomination in the second century which derived their name from Secundus, a disciple of Valentine. He maintained the doctrine of two eternal principles, viz. light and darkness, whence arose the good and evil that are observable in the universe. See VALENTINIANS.
One who decoys or draws away another from that which is right.
A denomination which arose in the year 1645. They derived their name from their maintaining that the true church ministry, Scripture, and ordinances, were lost, for which they were seeking. They taught that the Scriptures were uncertain; that present miracles were necessary to faith; that our ministry is without authority; and that our worship and ordinances are unnecessary or vain.
Disciples of Seleucus, a philosopher of Galatia, who, about the year 380, adopted the sentiments of Hermogenes and those of Audaeus. He taught, with the Valentinians, that Jesus Christ assumed a body only in appearance. He also maintained that the world was not made by God, but was co-eternal with him; and that the soul was only an animated fire created by the angels; that Christ does not sit at the right hand of the Father in a human body, but that he lodged his body in the sun, according to Ps. xix. 4; and that the pleasures of beatitude consisted in corporeal delight.
Includes all those various frauds which we practise on urselves in forming a judgment, or receiving an impression of our state, character, and conduct; or those deceits which make our hearts impose on us in making us promises, if they may be so termed, which are not kept, and ontracting engagements which are never performed. Self-deception, as one observes, appears in the following cases: "1. In judging of our own character, on which we too easily confer the name of self-examination, how often may we detect ourselves in enhancing the merit of the good qualities we possess, and in giving ourselves credit for others,which we really have not.--2. When several motives or passions concur in prompting us to any action, we too easily assign the chief place and effect to the best.--3. We are too prone to flatter ourselves by indulging the notion that our habits of vice are but individual acts, into which we have been seduced by occasional temptations, while we are easily led to assign the name of habits to our occasional acts and individual instances of virtue.--4. We confound the mere assent of the understanding naturally, attended by some correspondent but transient sensibilities, with the impulses of the affections and determination of the will.--5. We are apt to ascribe to settled principles the good actions, which are the mere effect of natural temper.--6. As sometimes, in estimating the character of others, we too hastily infer the right motive from the outward act; so in judging of ourselves we over-rate the worth, by over-valuing the motives of our actions.--7. We often confound the non-appearance of a vicious affection with its actual extinction.--8. We often deceive ourselves by comparing our actual with our former character and conduct, and perhaps too easily ascribing to the extirpation of vicious, or tha implantation of virtuous habits, that improvement which is owing merely to the lapse of time, advancing age, altered circumstances, &c.--9. another general and fertile source of self-deception is our readiness to excuse, or at least to extemate, the vices of our particular station: while we congratulate ourselves on the absence of other vices which we are under no temptation to commit.--10. We deceive ourselves by supposing our remorse for sin is genuine, when, alas, it does not lead to repentance.--11. By forming improper judgments of others, and forming our own conduct upon theirs." From this view we may learn, 1. That the objects as to which men deceive themselves are very numerous; God, Jesus Christ, the holy Spirit, the Bible and Gospel doctrines, religious experience, sin, heaven, hell, &c.--2. The causes are great and powerful; sin, Satan, the heart, the world, interest, prejudice.--3. The numbers who deceive themselves are great; the young, the aged, the rich, the poor, self-godly.--4. The evils are many and awful. It renders us the slaves of procrastination, leads us to over-rate ourselves, flatters us with an idea of easy victory, confirms our evil habits, and exposes us to the greatest danger.--5. We should endeavour to understand and practise the means not to be deceived; such as strict self-inquiry, prayer, watchfulness, and ever taking the Scriptures for our guide.--6. And lastly, we should learn to ascertin the evidence of not being deceived, which are such as these: when sin is the object of our increasing fear, a tenderness of conscience, when we can appeal to God as to the sincerity of our motives and aims, when dependent on God's promise, providence, and grace, and when conformed to him in all righteousness and true holiness. Christ. Obs. 1802, p. 632, 633.
The giving up of ourselves unreservedly to God; that we may serve him in righteousness and true holiness. See Howe's Works, vol. i. oct. edit.
Implies not only the preservation of one's life,
but also the protection of our property, because without property life cannot
be preserved in a civilized nation.
Some condemn all resistance, whatsoever be the
evil offered, or whosoever be the person that offers it; others will not admit
that it should pass any farther than bare resistance; others say, that it must
never be carried so far as hazarding the life of the assailant; and others
again, who deny it not to be lawful in some cases to kill the aggressor, at the
same time affirm it to be a thing more laudable and consonant to the Gospel, to
choose rather to lose one's life, in imitation of Christ, than to secure it at
the expense of another's in pursuance of the permission of nature. But.
"Notwithstanding," says Grove,
"the great names which may appear on the side of any of these opinions, I
cannot but think self-defence, though it proceeds to the killing of another to
save one's self, is in common cases not barely permitted, but enjoined by
nature; and that a man would be wanting to the Author of his being, to society,
and to himself, to abandon that life with which he is put in trust. That a
person forfeits his own life to the sword of justice, by taking away another's
unprovoked, is a principle not to be disputed. This being so, I ask, whence
should arise the obligation to let another kill me, rather than venture to save
myself by destroying my enemy? It cannot arise from a regard to society, which,
by my suffering another to kill me, loses two lives; that of an honest man by
unjust violence, and that of his murderer, if it can be called a loss, by the
hand of justice. Whereas, by killing the invader of my life, I only take a
life, which must oterwise have been forfeited, and preserve the life of an
innocent person. Nor, for the same reason, can there be any such obligation
arising from the love of our neighbour; since I do not really save his life b
parting with my own, but only leave him to be put to death after a more
ignominious manner by the public executioner. And if it be said that I dispatch
him with his sins upon him into the other world, which he might have lived long
enough to repent of, if legally condemned: as he must answer for that, who
brought me under a necessity of using this method for my own preservation; so I
myself may not be prepared, or may not think myself so, or so well assured of
it as to venture into the presence of my great Judge; and no charity obliges me
to prefer the safety of another's soul to my own. Self-defence, therefore, may
be with justice practised, 1. Incase of an attempt made upon the life of a
person, against which he has no other way of securing himself but repelling force
by force.--2. It is generally esteemed lawful to kill in the defence of
chastity, supposing there be no other way of preserving it." See Grove's
Moral Philosophy. Also Hints on the Lowfulness of Self-defence, by a Scotch
Dissenter.
A term that denotes our relinquishing every thing that stands in opposition to the divine command, and our own spiritual welfare, Matthew, xvi. 24. It does not consist in denying what a man is, or what he has: in refusing favours converred on us in the course of providence; in rejecting the use of God's creatures; in being careless of life, health, and family; in macerating the body, or abusing it in any respect; but in renouncing al those pleasures, profets, views, connections, or practices, that are prejudicial to the true interests of the soul. The understanding must be so far denied as not to lean upon it, independent of divine instruction, Prov. iii. 5, 6. The will must be denied, so far as it opposes the will of God, Eph. v. 17. The affections, when they become inordinate, Col. iii. 5. The gratification of the members of the body must be denied when out of their due course, Rom. vi. 12, 13. The honours of the world, and praise of men, when they become a snare, Heb. xi. 24-26. Worldly emoluments, when to be obtained in an unlawful way, or when standing in opposition to religion and usefulness, Matt. iv. 20-22. Friends and relatives, so far as they oppose the truth, and would influence us to oppose it too, Gen. xii. 1. Our own righteousness, so as to depend upon it, Phil. iii. 8, 9. Life itself must be laid down, if called for, in the cause of Christ, Matt. xvi. 24, 25. In fine, every thing that is sinful must be denied, however pleasant, and apparently advantageous, since, without holiness, no man shall see the Lord, Heb. xii. 14. To enable us to practise this duty, let us consider the injunction of Christ, Matt. xvi. 24; his eminent example, Phil. ii. 5, 8; the encouragement he gives, Matt. xvi. 25; the example of his saints in all ages; Heb. xi.; the advantages that attend it, and, above all, learn to implore the agency of that Divine Spirit, without whom we can do nothing.
Is the calling ourselves to a strict account for all the actions of our lives, comparing them with the word of God, the rule of duty; considering how much evil we have committed, and good we have omitted. It is a duty founded on a divine command, 2 Cor. xiii. 5. and ought to be, 1. Deliberately.--2. Frequently.--3. Impartially.--4. Diligently.--5. Wisely.--And, 6. With a desire of amendment. This, though a legal duty, as some modern Christians would call it, is essential to our improvement, our felicity, and interest. "They," says Mr. Wiberforce, (Pract. View.) "who, in a crazy vessel, navigate a sea wherein are shoals and currents innumerable, if they would keep their course, or reach their port in safety, must carefully repair the smallest injuries, and often throw out their line, and take their observations. In the voyage of life, also, the Christian who would not make shipwreck on his faith, while he is habitually watchful and provident, must make it his express business to look into his state, and ascertain his progress."
Is his entire existence of himself, not owing it to any other being whatsoever: and thus God would exist, if there were to other being in the whole compass of nature but himself. See EXISTENCE and ETERNITY OF GOD.
See HEART.
See SELF-SEEKING.
The knowledge of one's own character, abilities, duties, principles, prejudices, tempers, secret springs of action, thoughts, memory, taste, views in life, virtues, and vices. This knowledge is commanded in the Scriptures, Psalm iv. 4. 2 Cor. xiii. 5. and is of the greatest utility, as it is the spring of self-possession, leads to humility, steadfastness, charity, moderation, self-denial, and promotes our usefulness in the world. To obtain it, there should be watchfulness, frequent and close attention to the operations of our own minds, regard had to the opinions of others, conversation, reading the Scriptures, and dependence on divine grace. See Mason on Self-knowledge; Baxter's Self-Acquaintance; Locke on the Underst.; Watts's Improvement of the Mind.
Is that instinctive principle which impels every
animal, rational and irrational, to preserve its life and promote its own
happiness. "It is very generally confounded with selfishness; but,
perhaps, the one propensity is distinct from the other. Every man loves
himself, but every man is not selfish. The selfish man grasps at all immediate
advantages, regardless of the consequences which his conduct may have upon his
neighbour. Self-love only prompts him who is actuated by it to procure to
himself the greatest possible sum of happiness during the whole of his
existence. In this pursuit, the rational self-lover will often forego a present
enjoyment to obtain a greater and more permanent one in reversion; and he will
as often submit to a present pain to avoid a greater hereafter. Self-love, as
distinguished from selfishness, always comprehends the whole of a man's
existence; and, in that extended sense of the phrase, every man is a
self-lover; for, with eternity in his view, it is surely not possible for the
most disinterested of the human race not to prefer himself to all other men, if
their future and everlasting interests could come into competition. This,
indeed, they never can do; for though the introduction of evil into the world,
and the different ranks which it makes necessary in society, put it in the
power of a man to raise himself in the present state by the depression of his
neighbour, or by the practice of injustice; yet, in the pursuit of the glorious
prize which is set before us, there can be no rivalship among the competitors.
The success of one is no injury to another; and therefore, in this snese of the
phrase, self-love is not only lawful, but absolutely unavoidable."
Self-love, however, says Jortin (ser. 13. vol. iv. ) is vicious, 1. When it
leads us to judge too favourably of our faults.--2. When we think too well of
our righteousness, and over-value our good actions, and are pure in our own
eyes.--3. When we over-value our abilities, and entertain too good an opinion
of our knowledge and capacity.--4. When we are proud and vain of inferior
things, and value ourselves upon the station and circumstances in which, not
our own deserts, but some other cause, has placed us.--5. When we make our
worldly interest, convenience, ease or pleasure, the great end of our actions.
Much has been said about the doctrine of
disinterested love to God. It must be confessed, that we ought to love him for
his own excellences; yet it is difficult to form an idea how we can love God
unconnected with any interest to ourselves. What, indeed, we ought to do, and
what we really do, or can do, is very different. There is an everlasting
obligation on men to love God for what he is, however incapable of doine it;
but, at the same time, our love to him is our interest; nor can we, in the
present state, I think, while possessed of such bodies and such minds, love God
without including a sense of his relative goodness. "We love him,"
says John, "because he first loved us." See LOVE.
The aiming at our own interest only in every thing we do. It must be distinguished from that regard which we ought to pay to the preservation of our health, the cultivation of our minds, the lawful concerns of business, and the salvation of our souls. Self-seeking evidences itself by parsimoniousness, oppression, neglect, and contempt of others, rebellion, sedition, egotism, immoderate attempts to gain fame, power, pleasure, money, and frequently by gross acts of lying and injustice. Its evils are numerous. It is highly dishonourable and abasing; transforming a man into any thing or every thing for his own interest. It is sinful, and the source of innumerable sins; as perjury, hypocrisy, falsehood, idolatry, persecution, and murder itself. It is dangerous. It excites contempt, is the source of tyranny, discord, war, and makes a man a slave, and exposes him to the just indignation of God. The remedies to prevent or suppress this evil are these. Consider that it is absolutely prohibited. Jerem. xlv. 5. Luke ix. 23. Heb. xiii. 5. Col. iii. 5. A mark of a wicked, degenerate mind; that the most awful curses are pronounced against it. Isa. v. 18. hab. iii. 9, 12. Isa. xv. 1, 2. Amos vi. 1. Mic. ii. 1, 2; that it is contrary to the example of all wise and good men: that the most awful examples of the punishment of this sin are recorded in Scripture; as Pharaoh, Achan, Haman, Gehazi, Absalom, Ananias and Sapphira, Judas, and many others.
So called from Sembianus their leader, who condemned all use of wine as evil of itself. He persuaded his followers that wine was a production of Satan and the earth, denied the resurrection of the body, and rejected most of the books of the Old Testament.
Were thus denominated, because, in profession, they condemned the errors of the Arians, but in reality maintained their principles, only palliating and concealing them under softer and more moderate terms. They would not allow, with the orthodox, that the Son was of the same substance, but only of a like substance with the Father; and thus, though in expression they differed from the orthodox in a single letter only, yet in effect they denied the divinity of Jesus Christ. The Semi-arianism of the moderns consists in their maintaining that the Son was, from all eternity, begotten by the will of the Father; contrary to the doctrine of those who teach that the eternal generation is necessary. Such, at least, are the respective opinions of Dr. Clarke and Bishop Bull.
A name anciently, and even at this day, given to
such as retain some tincture of Pelagianism.
Cassian, who had been a deacon of Constantinople,
who was afterwards a priest at Marceilles, was the chief of these
Semi-Pelagians, whose leading principles were, 1. That God did not dispense his
grace to one more than another, in consequence of predestination, i.e. an
eternal and absolute decree, but was willing to save all men, if they complied
with the terms of his Gospel.--2. That Christ died for all men.--3. That the
grace purchased by Christ, and necessary to salvation, was offered to all
men.--4. That man, before he received grace, was capable of faith and holy
desires.--5. That man was born free, and was, consequently, capable of
resisting the influences of grace, or of complying with its suggestion.--6. The
Semi-Pelagians were very numerous; and the doctrine of Cassian, though
variously explained, was received in the greatest part of the monastic schools
in Gaul, from whence it spread itself far and wide through the European
provinces. As to the Greeks, and other Eastern Christians, they had embraced
the Semi-Pelagian doctrines before Cassian. In the sixth century the
controversy between the Semi-Pelagians and the disciples of Augustin prevailed
much, and continued to divide the Western churches.
Properly signifies that internal act by which we are made conscious of pleasure or pain felt at the organ of sense. As to sensations and feelings, says Cr. Reid, some belong to the animal part of our nature, and are common to us with the brutes; others belong to the rational and moral part. The first are more properly called sensations; the last, feelings. The French word sentiment is common to both. The design of the Almighty in giving us both the painful and agreeable feelings is, for the most part, obvious, and well deserving our notice. 1. The painful sensations are admonitions to avoid what would hurt us; and the agreeable sensations to invite us to those actions that are necessary to the preservation of the individual or the kind.--2. By the same means, nature invites us to moderate bodily exercise, and admonishes us to avoid idleness and inactivity on the one hand, and excessive labour on the other.--3. The moderate exercise of all our rational powers gives pleasure.--4. Every species of beauty is beheld with pleasure, and every species of deformity with disgust.--5. The benevolent affections are all accompanied with an agreeable feeling; the malevolent on the contrary; and,--6. The highest, the noblest, and the most durable pleasure is that of doing well; and the most bitter and painful sentiment, the anguish and remorse of a guilty conscience. See Theorie des Sentiments Agreables; Reid on the Intellectual Powers, p. 332; Kaims's Elements of Criticism, vol. ii. p. 501.
A faculty of the soul, whereby it perceives
external objects by means of impressions made on the organs of the body.
Moral Sense is said to be an apprehension of that
beauty or deformity which arises in the mind by a kind of natural instinct,
previously to any reasoning upon the remoter consequences of actions. Whether
this really exists or not, is disputed. On the affirmative side it is said,
that, 1. We approve or disapprove certain actions without deliberation.--2.
This approbation or disapprobation is uniform and universal. But against this
opinion it is answered, that, 1. This uniformity of sentiment does not pervade
all nations.--2. Approbation of particular conduct arises from a sense of its
advantages. The idea continues when the motive no longer exists; receives
strength from authority, imitation, &c. The efficacy of imitation is most
observable in children.--3. There are no maxims universally true, but bend to
circumstances.--4. There can be no idea without an object, and instinct is
inseparable from the idea of the object. See Paley's Moral Philosophy, vol. 1.
chap. v.; Hutcheson on the Passions, p. 245, &c.; Mason's Sermons, vol. i.
p. 253.
The name given to a Greek version of the books
of the Old Testament, from its being supposed to be the work of seventy-two
Jews, who are usually called the seventy interpreters, because seventy is a
round number.
Aristobulus, who was a tutor to Ptolemy Physcon;
Philo, who lived in our Saviour's time, and was contemporary with the apostles;
and Josephus, speak of this translation as made by seventy-two interpreters, by
the care of Demetrius Phalereus, in the reign of Ptolemy Philadelphus. All the
Christian writers, during the first fifteen centuries of the Christian aera,
have admitted this account of the Septuagint as an undoubted fact; but, since
the reformation, critics have boldly called it in question. But whatever
differences of opinion there have been as to the mode of translation, it is
universally acknowledged that such a version, whole or in part, existed; and it
is pretty evident that most of the books must have been translated before our
Saviour's time, as they are quoted by him. It must also be considered as a
wonderful providence in favour of the religion of Jesus. It prepared the way
for his coming, and afterwards greatly promoted the setting up of his kingdom
in the world; for hitherto the Scriptures had remained locked up from all other
nations but the Jews, in the Hebrew tongue, which was understood by no other
nation; but now it was translated into the Greek language, which was a language
commonly understood by the nations of the world. It has also been with great
propriety observed, "that there are many words and forms of speech in the
New Testament, the true import of which cannot be known but by their use in the
Septuagint. This version also preserves many important words, some sentences,
and several whole verses which originally made a part of the Hebrew text, but
have long ago entirely disappeared. This is the version, and this only, which
is constantly used and quoted in the Gospels and the apostles, and which has
thereby received the highest sanction which any writings can possibly receive."
There have been various editions of the
Septuagint; such as Breitenger's edition, 1730; Boss's edition, 1709; Daniel's
edition, 1653; Mill's edition, 12mo. 1725; bishop Pearson's printed by Field,
12mo. 1665; but Grabe's edition, published in 1707, is in great repute.
Dr. Holmes, canon of Christ Church, was employed
for some years on a correct edition of the Septuagint. He had been collating
from more than three hundred Greek manuscripts; from twenty or more Coptic,
Syriac, Arabic, Sclavonian, and Armenian manuscripts; from eleven editions of
the Greek text and versions; and from near thirty Greek fathers, when death
prevented him from finishing this valuable work. He printed the whole of the
Pentateuch in five parts follo; and lately edited the prophecy of Daniel
according to Theodotian and the LXX., departing from his proposed order, as if
by a presentiment of his end. This valuable work is now continued by Mr.
Parsons, of Cambridge.
Those who desire a larger account of this
translation, may consult Hody de Bib. Textibus; Prideaux's Connections; Owen's
Inquiry into the Septuagint Version; Blair's Lectures on the Canon; and
Michaelis's Introduction to the New Testament; Clarke's Bibliotheca.
The third Sunday before the first Sunday in Lent; so called because it was about 70 days before Easter.
The chronology which is formed from the dates and periods of time mentioned in the Septuagint translation of the Old Testament. It reckons 1500 years more from the creation to Abraham than the Hebrew Bible. Dr. Kennicott, in the dissertation prefixed to his Hebrew Bible, has shown it to be very probable that the chronology of the Hebrew Scriptures, since the period just mentioned, was corrupted by the Jews between the years 175 and 200; and that the chronology of the Septuagint is more agreeable to truth. It is a fact, that during the second and third centuries, the Hebrew Scriptures were almost entirely in the hands of the Jews, while the Septuagint was confined to the Christians. The Jews had, therefore, a very favourable opportunity for this corruption. The following is the reason which is given by Oriental writers; It being a very ancient tradition that Messiah was to come in the sixth chiliad, because he was to come in the last days, (founded on a mystical application of the six days creation,) the contrivance was to shorten the age of the world from about 5500 to 3760; and thence to prove that Jesus could not be the Messiah. Dr. Kennicott adds, that some Hebrew copies, having the larger chronology, were extant till the time of Eusebius, and some till the year 700.
A term often used as synonymous with religion.
A discourse delivered in public for the purpose
of religious instruction and improvement.
In order to make a good sermon, the following
things may be attended to. The exordium should correspond with the subject on
which we are about to treat. For this purpose the context often forms a source
of appropriate remark; and this, though called a hackneyed way, is one of the
best for opening gradually to the subject; though, I confess, always to use it
is not so well, as it looks formal. There are some subjects in which the
context cannot be consulted: then, perhaps, it is best to begin with some
passage of Scripture apposite to the subject, or some striking observation. It
has been debated, indeed, whether we should begin with any thing particularly
calculated to gain the attention, or whether we should rise gradually in the
strength of remark and aptness of sentiment. As to this, we may observe, that,
although it is acknowledged that a minister should flame most towards the end,
perhaps it would be well to guard against a too low and feeble manner in the
exordium. It has been frequently the practice of making apologies, by way of
introduction: though this may be admitted in some singular cases, as on the
sudden death of a minister, or disappointment of the preacher through
unforeseen circumstances; yet I think it is often made use of where it is
entirely unnecessary, and carries with it an air of affectation and pride. An
apology for a man's self is often more a reflection than any thing else. If he
be not qualified, why have the effrontery to engage? and, if qualified, why
tell the people an untruth?
Exordiums should be short: some give ua an
abridgment of their sermons in their introduction, which takes off the people's
attention afterwards; others promise so much, that the expectation thereby
raised is often disappointed. Both these should be avoided; and a simple,
correct, modest, deliberate, easy gradation to the text attended to.
As to the plan. Sometimes a text may be discussed
by exposition and inference; sometimes by raising a proposition, as the general
sentiment of the text, from which several truths may be deduced and insisted on;
sometimes by general observations; and sometimes by division. If we discuss by
exposition, then we should examine the authenticity of the reading, the
accuracy of the translation, and the scope of the writer, translation, and the
scope of the writer. If a proposition be raised, care should be taken that it
is founded on the meaning of the text. If observations be made, they should not
be too numerous, foreign, nor upon every particle in the text. If by division,
the heads should be distinct and few, yet have a just dependence on and
connection one with the other. It was common in the last two centuries to have
such a multitude of heads, subdivisions, observations, and inferences, that
hardly any one could remember them: it is the custom of the present day, among
many, to run into the other extreme, and to have no division at all. This is
equally as injurious. "I have no notion," says one, "of the
great usefulness of a sermon without heads and divisions. They should be few
and distinct, and not coincide. But a general harangue, or a sermon with a
concealed division, is very improper for the generality of hearers, especially
the comon people, as they can neither remember it, nor so well understand
it." Another observes: "We should ever remember that we are speaking
to the plainest capacities; and as the arranging our ideas properly is
necessary to our being understood, so the giving each division of our discourse
its denomination of number, has a happy effect to assist the attention and
memory of our hearers."
As to the amplification. After having laid a good
foundation on which to build, the superstructure should be raised with care.
"Let every text have its true meaning, every truth its due weight, every
hearer his proper portion." The reasoning should be clear, deliberate, and
strong. No flights of wit should be indulged; but a close attention to the
subject, with every exertion to inform the judgment and impress the heart. It
is in this part of a sermon that it will be seen whether a man understands his
subject, enters into the spirit of it, or whether, after all his parade, he be
a mere trifler. I have known some, who, after having giving a pleasing exordium
and ingenious plan, have been very deficient in the amplification of the
subject; which shows that a man may be capable of making a good plan, and not a
good sermon, which, of the two, perhaps, is worse than making a good sermon
without a good plan. The best of men, however, cannot always enter into the
subject with that ability which at certain times they are capable of. If in our
attempts, therefore, to enlarge on particulars, we find our thoughts do not run
freely on any point, we should not urge them too much--this will tire and jade
the faculties too soon; but pursue our plan. Better thoughts may occur
afterwards, which we may occasionally insert.
As to the application. It is much to be lamented
that this is a part which does not belong to the sermons of some divines. They
can discuss a topic in a general way, show their abilities, and give pleasing
descriptions of virtue and religion; but to apply, they think will hurt the
feelings of their auditors. But I believe it has been found that, among such,
little good has been done; nor is it likely, when the people are never led to
suppose that they are the parties interested. There are also some doctrinal
preachers who reject application altogether, and who affect to discharge their
office by narrating and reasoning only: but such should remember that reasoning
is persuasion; and that themselves, as often as any men, slide into personal
application, especially in discussing certain favourite points in divinity.
Application is certainly one of the most important parts of a sermon. Here both
the judgment and the passions should be powerfully addressed. Here the minister
must reason, expostulate, invite, warn, and exhort; and all without harshness
and an insulting air. Here pity, love, faithfulness, concern, must be all
displayed. The application, however, must not be too long, unnatural, nor, I
think, concluded abruptly.--We shall now subjoin a few remarks as to the style
and delivery.
As to style: it should be perspicuous. Singular
terms, hard words, bombastic expressions, are not at all consistent. Quoting
Latin and Greek sentences will be of little utility. Long argumentations, and
dry metaphysical reasoning, should be avoided. A plain manly style, so clear
that it cannot be misunderstood, should be pursued. The Scriptures are the best
model. Mr. Flavel says,"The devil is very busy with ministers in their
studies, tempting them to lofty language, and terms of art, above their hearers
capacities."
The style should be correct. That a man may
preach, and do good, without knowing much of grammar, is not to be doubted; but
certainly it cannot be pleasing to hear a man, who sets himself up as a teacher
of others, continually violating all the rules of grammar, and rendering
himself a laughing-stock to the more intelligent part of the congregation;
"and yet," says one,"I have heard persons, who could scarce
utter three sentences without a false construction, make grammatical criticisms
not only on the English language, but on Latin, Greek, and Hebrew."
Care should always be taken not to use a
redundancy of words, and a jingle of sentences and syllables, as they carry
more an air of pedantry than of prudence.
As to the use of figures. "A noble metaphor,
when it is placed to advantage, casts a kind of glory round it, and darts a
lustre through a whole sentence." But the present and the past age have
abounded with preachers, who have murdered and distorted figures in a shameful
manner. Keach's metaphors are run beyond all due bounds. Yet I know of no
method so useful in preaching as by figures, when well chosen, when they are
not too mean, nor draws out into too many parallels. The Scriptures abound with
figures. Our Lord and his disciples constantly used them; and people understand
a subject better when represented by a figure, than by learned disquisitions.
As to the delivery of sermons, we refer to the
articles DECLAMATION and ELOQUENCE. See also MINISTER and PREACHING.
Or OPHITES, heretics in the second century, so called from the veneration they had for the serpent that tempted Eve, and the worship paid to a real serpent: they pretended that the serpent was Jesus Christ, and that he taught men the knowledge of good and evil. They distinguished between Jesus and Christ. Jesus, they said, was born of the Virgin, but Christ came down from heaven to be united with him: Jesus was crucified, but Christ had left him to return to heaven. They distinguished the God of the Jews, whom they termed Jaldabaoth, from the supreme God: to the former they ascribed the body, to the latter the soul of men. It is said they had a live serpent, which they kept in a kind of cage: at certain times they opened the cage-door, and called the serpent: the animal came out, and, mounting upon the table, twined itself about some loaves of bread. This bread they broke, and distributed it to the company; and this they called their Eucharist.
The business of servants is to wait upon, minister to, support and defend their masters; but there are three cases, as Dr. Stennett observes, wherein a servant may be justified in refusing obedience: 1. When the master's commands are contrary to the will of God.--2. When they are required to do what is not in their power.--3. When such service is demanded as falls not within the compass of the servant's agreement. The obligations servants are under to universal obedience, are from these considerations: 1. That it is fit and right.--2. That it is the expressed command of God.--3. That it is for the interest both of body and soul.--4. That it is a credit to our holy religion. The manner in which this service is to be performed is, 1. With humility, Prov. xxx. 21, 22; Eccl. x. 7.--2. Fidelity, Titus ii. 10; Matt. xxiv. 45.--3. Diligence, Prov. x. 4. xxi. 5; 1 Thess. iv. 11.--4. Cheerfulness. Stennett's Domestic Duties, ser. 7; Fleetwood's Relative Duties, ser. 14, 15; Paley's Moral Philosophy, vol. i. chap. 11.
A religious order in the church of Rome, founded about the year 1233 by seven Florentine merchants, who, with the approbation of the bishop of Florence, renounced the world, and lived together in a religious community on Mount Senar, two leagues from that city.
Heretics who paid divine worship to Seth, whom they looked upon to be Jesus Christ, the Son of God, but who was made by a third divinity, and substituted in the room of the two families of Abel and Cain, which had been destroyed by the deluge. They appeared in Egypt in the second century; and, as they were addicted to all sorts of debauchery, they did not want followers. They continued in Egypt above two hundred years.
About the year B. C. 277, the Old Testament was translated into Greek, by the united labours of about seventy learned Jews, and that translation has been since known by the version of the LXX. See SEPTUAGINT.
See ANGELITES.
The second Sunday before Lent; so called because about the 60th day before Easter.
A sect which was instituted about the year 1774, in America. Anna Leese, whom they style the Elect Lady, is the head of this party. They assert that she is the woman spoken of in the 12th chap. of Revelations, and that she speaks seventy-two tongues, and though those tongues are unintelligible to the living, she converses with the dead, who understand her language. They add farther, that she is the mother of all the elect, and that she travails for the whole world; that, in fine, no blessing can descend to any person but only by and through her, and that in the way of her being possessed of their sins by their confessing and repenting of them, one by one, according to her direction. they vary in their exercises: their heavy dancing, as it is called, is performed by a perpetual springing from the house floor, about four inches up and down, both in the men's and women's apartment, moving about with extraordinary transport, singing sometimes one at a time, and sometimes more. This elevation affects the nerves, so that they have intervals of shuddering, as if they were in a violent fit of the ague. They sumetimes clap their hands, and leap so high as to strike the joists above their heads. They throw off their outside garment in these exercises, and spend their strength very cheerfully this way: their chief speaker often calls for their attention, when they all stop and hear some harangue, and then begin dancing again. The assert that their dancing is the token of the great joy and happiness of the Jerusalem state, and denotes the victory over sin. One of their most favourite exertions is turning round very swiftly for an hour or two. This, they say, is to show the great power of God. Such is the account which different writers have given us of this sect; but others observe, that though, at first, they used these violent gesticulations, now they have "a regular, solemn, uniform dance, or genuflection, to a regular, solemn hymn which is sung by the elders, and as regularly conducted as a proper band of music." See New York Theol. Mag. for Nov. and Dec. 1795.
A painful sensation, occasioned by the quick apprehension that reputation and character are in danger, or by the perception that they are lost. It may arise, says Cr. Cogan, from the immediate detection, or the fear of detection, in something ignominious. It may also arise from native diffidence in young and ingenuous minds, when surprised into situations where they attract the peculiar attention of their superiors. The glow of shame indicates, in the first instance, that the mind is not totally abandoned; in the last, it manifests a nice sense of honour and delicate feelings, united with inexperience and ignorance of the world.
The name of a book in high estimation among the idolaters of Hindostan, containing all the dogmas of the religion of the Bramins, and all the ceremonies of their worship.
The day before Ash Wednesday or Lent, on which, in former times, persons went to their parish churches to confess their sins.
Prophecies delivered, it is said, by certain women of antiquity, showing the fates and revolutions of kingdoms. We have a collection of them in eight books. Dr. Jorton observes, that they were composed at different times by different persons; first by Pagans, and then, perhaps, by Jews, and certainly by Christians. They abound with phrases, words, facts, and passages,taken from the LXX, and the New Testament. They are, says the Doctor, a remarkable specimen of astonishing impudence and miserable poetry, and seem to have been, from first to last, and without any one exception, mere impostures.
Is the corrupt presentation of any one to an ecclesiastical benefice, for money, gift, or reward. It is so called from the resemblance it is said to bear to the sin of Simon Magus, though the purchasing of holy orders seems to approach nearer to this offence. It was by the canon law a very grievous crime; and is so much the more odious, because, as Sir Edward Coke observes, it is ever accompanied with perjury; for the presentee is sworn to have committed no simony. However, it was not an offence punishable in a criminal way at the common law, it being thought sufficient to leave the clergy to ecclesiastical censures. But as these did not affect the simonical patron, nor were efficacious enough to repel the notorious practice of the thing, divers acts of parliament have been made to restrain it, by means of civil forfeitures, which the modern prevailing usage with regard to spiritual preferments calls aloud to be put in execution.
The transgression of the law, or want of
conformity to the will of God, 1 John iii. 4. 1. Original sin is that whereby
our whole nature is corrupted, and rendered contrary to the law of God; or,
according to the 9th article of the church of England, "It is that whereby
man is very far gone from original righteousness, and is, of his own nature,
inclined to evil." This is sometimes called indwelling sin, Rom. vii. The
imputation of the sin of Adam to his posterity is also what divines generally
call, with some latitude of expression, original sin.--2. Actual sin is a
direct violation of God's law, and generally applied to those who are capable
of committing moral evil; as opposed to idiots, or children, who have not the
right use of their powers.--3. Sins of omission consist in the leaving those
things undone which ought to be done.--4. Sins of commission are those which
are committed against affirmative precepts, or doing what should not be
done.--5. Sins of infirmity are those which arise from the infirmity of the
flesh, ignorance, surprise, snares of the world, &c. See INFIRMITY.--6.
Secret sins are those committed in secret, or those which we, through blindness
or prejudice, do not see the evil of, Psalm xix. 12.--7. Presumptuous sins are
those which are done boldly, and against light and conviction. See
PRESUMPTION.--8. Unpardonable sin is the denial of the truths of the Gospel;
with an open and malicious rejection of it. The reason why this sin is never
forgiven, is not because of any want of sufficiency in the blood of Christ, nor
in the pardoning mercy of God, but because such as commit it never repent of
it, but continue obstinate and malignant until death.
The corruption of human nature is, 1. Universal
as to the subjects of it. Rom.iii.23. Isa. liii. 6.--2. General, as to all the
powers of man, Isa. i. 6.--3. Awful, filling the mind with constant rebellion
against God and his law.--4. Hateful to God, Job xv. 16; and,--5. Punishable by
him, 1 Sam. ii. 9, 10. Rom. ii. 9. Why the Almighty permitted it, when his
power could have prevented it, and how it is conveyed from parents to their
children, form some of those deep things of God, of which we can know but
little in the present state; only this we are assured of, that he is a God of
truth, and that whatever he does, or permits, will ultimately tend to promote
his glory. While we contemplate, therefore, the nature, the evil, the guilt,
the consequence of sin, it is our happiness to reflect, that he who permitted
it hath provided a remedy for it; and that he "so loved the world, that he
gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him should not perish,
but have everlasting life." See ATONEMENT, REDEMPTION; and Edwards,
Wesley, and Taylor, on Original Sin; Gill's Body of Div. article Sin; King's
and Jenyns's Origin of Evil; Burroughs' Exceeding Sinfulness of Sin; Dr. Owen
on Indwelling Sin; Dr. Wright's Deceitfulness of Sin; Fletcher's appeal to
Matter of Fact; Williams's Answer to Belsham; Watts's Ruin and Recovery; Howe's
Living Temple, p. 2. c. 4; Dr. Smith's Sermon on the Permission of Evil.
Freedom from hypocrisy or dissimulation. The Latin word sincerus, from whence our English word sincere is derived, is composed of sine and cera, and signifies without wax, as pure honey, which is not mixed with any wax; thus denoting that sincerity is a pure and upright principle. The Greek word translated sincerity, (2 Cor. i. 12.) signifies properly a judgment made of things by the light and splendour of the sun: as, in traffic, men hold up goods they are buying, to the light of the sun, to see if they can discover any defect in them. Thus those who are truly sincere can bear the test of light, and are not afraid of having their principles and practices examined by it. This word, however, like many others, is abused, and often becomes a subterfuge for the ungodly and the indolent, who think that their practice is nothing; but that sincerity, or a good heart, as they call it, is all in all. But such deceive themselves, for a tree is known by its fruits; and true godly sincerity will evidence itself by serious inquiry, impartial examination, desire of instruction, unprejudiced judgment, devotedness of spirit, and uniformity of conduct. The reader will find this subject ably handled in Gurnall's Christian Armour, vol. ii. p. 121, to 148. See HYPOCRISY.
An ordinance of divine worship, in which we
express our joy in God, and gratitude for his mercies. It has always been a
branch both of natural and revealed religion, in all ages and periods of time.
It was a part of the worship of the Heathens. It was practised by the people of
God before the giving of the law of Moses, Exod. xv. also under the ceremonial
law. Under the Gospel dispensation it is particularly enjoined, Col. iii. 16.
Eph. v. 19. It was practised by Christ and his apostles, Matt. xxvi. 30. and in
the earliest times of Christianity. The praises of God may be sung privately in
the family, but chiefly in the house of God; and should be attended to with
reverence, sincerity, joy, gratitude, and with the understanding, 1 Cor. xiv.
15. Among the Baptists, during the early part of their existence, psalmody was
generally excluded as a human ordinance; but some congregations having adopted
it about the beginning of the 18th century, a violent controversy was excited.
About the middle of the century, however, the praises of God were sung in every
Baptist church. It is to be lamented, however, that this ordinance has not that
attention paid to it which it deserves. That great divine, Dr. Jonathan
Edwards, observes, that "as it is the command of God that all should sing,
so all should make conscience of learning to sing, as it is a thing that cannot
be decently performed at all without learning. Those, therefore, (where there
is no natural inability) who neglect to learn to sing, live in sin, as they
neglect what is necessary in order to their attending one of the ordinances of
God's worship." We leave those who are wilfully dumb in God's house to
consider this pointed remark!
Much has been said as to the use of instrumental
music in the house of God. On the one side it is observed, that we ought not to
object to it, because it assists devotion; that it was used in the worship of
God under the Old Testament; and that the worship of heaven is represented by a
delightful union of vocal and instrumental music. But on the other side, it is
remarked, that nothing should be done in or about God's worship without example
or precept from the New Testament; that, instead of aiding devotion, it often
tends to draw off the mind from the right object; that it does not accord with
the simplicity of Christian worship; that the practice of those who lived under
the ceremonial dispensation can be no rule for us; that not one text in the New
Testament requires or authorises it by precept or example, by express words or
fair inference; and that the representation of the musical harmony in heaven is
merely figurative language, denoting the happiness of the saints. We have not
room here to prosecute the arguments on either side; but the reader may refer
to p. 211. of the fourth volume of Bishop Beveridge's Thesaurus;
Stillingfleet's and Bp. Horne's Sermons on Church Music; No. 630 of the eighth
vol. of the Spectator; Bishop Horne on the 150th Psalm; Theol. Mag. vol. ii. p.
427, and vol. iv. p. 333, 458; Biblical Mag. vol. ii. p. 35; Ridgley's body of
Div. ques. 155; Haweis's Church History, vol. i. p. 403; Williams's Historical
Essay on Church Music, prefixed to Psalmodia Evangelica, vol. ii. p. 56;
Bedford's Temple Music; Lyra Evangelica; Practical Discourses on Singing in the
Worship of God, preached at the Friday Evening Lectures in Eastcheap, 1708;
Dodwell's Treatise on the Lawfulness of Instrumental Music in Holy Duties.
Law of. See STATUTES.
According to Dr. Barrow, is uttering false
speeches against our neighbour, to the prejudice of his fame, safety, welfare;
and that out of malignity, vanity, rashness, ill nature, or bad design. The
principal kinds of slander are these: 1. Charging others with facts they are
not guilty of.--2. Affixing scandalous names and odious characters which they
deserve not.--3. Aspersing a man's actions with foul names, importing that they
proceed from evil principles, or tend to bad ends, when it doth not or cannot
appear.--4. Perverting a man's words or acts disadvantageously by affected
misconstruction.--5. Partial or lame representation of men's discourse or
practice, suppressing some part of the truth, or concealing some circumstances
which ought to be explained.--6. Instilling sly suggestions which create prejudice
in the hearers.--7. Magnifying and aggravating the faults of others.--8.
Imputing to our neighbour's practice, judgment, or profession, evil
consequences which have no foundation in truth.
Of all the characters in society, a slanderer is
the most odious, and the most likely to produce mischief. "His
tongue," says the great Massilon, "is a devouring fire, which
tarnishes whatever it touches; which exercises its fury on the good grain
equally as on the chaff; on the profane as on the sacred; which, wherever it
passes, leaves only desolation and ruin; digs even into the bowels of the
earth; turns into vile ashes what only a moment before had appeared to us so
precious and brilliant, acts with more violence and danger than ever, in the
time when it was apparently smothered up and almost extinct; which blackens
what it cannot consume, and sometimes sparkles and delights before it destroys.
It is an assemblage of an iniquity, a secret pride, which discovers to us the
mote in our brother's eye, but hides the beam which is in our own; a mean envy,
which, hurt at the talents or prosperity of others, makes them the subjects of
its censures, and studies to dim the splendour of whatever outshines itself; a
disguised hatred, which sheds in its speeches the hidden venom of the heart; an
unworthy duplicity which praises to the face, and tears in pieces behind the
back; a shameful levity, which has no command over itself or words, and often
sacrifices both fortune and comfort to the imprudence of an amusing conversation;
a deliberate barbarity, which goes to pierce an absent brother; a scandal,
where we become a subject of shame and sin to those who listen to us; an
injustice, where we ravish from our brother what is dearest to him. It is a
restless evil, which disturbs society; spreads dissention through cities and
countries; disunites the strictest friendship; is the source of hatred and
revenge; fills wherever it enters with disturbances and confusion; and every
where is an enemy to peace, comfort, and Christian good breeding. Lastly, it is
an evil full of deadly poison: whatever flows from it is infected, and poisons
whatever it approaches; even its praises are empoisoned; its applauses
malicious; its silence criminal; its gestures, motions, and looks, have alltheir
venom, and spread it each in their way. Still more dreadful is this evil when
it is found among those who are the professed disciples of Jesus Christ. Ah!
the church formerly held in horror the exhibitions of gladiators, and denied
that believers, brought up in the tenderness and benignity of Jesus Christ,
could innocently feast their eyes with the blood and death of these unfortunate
slaves, or form an harmless recreation of so inhuman a pleasure; but these
renew more detestable shows; for they bring upon the stage not infamous
wretches devoted to death, but members of Jesus Christ, their brethren; and
there they entertain the spectators with wounds which they inflict on
persons" who have devoted themselves to God. Barrow's Works, vol. i. ser.
17, 18; Massilon's Sermons, vol. i. ser. v. English trans. and article EVIL
SPEAKING.
Freedom from any inordinate passion. "Sobriety," as one observes, "is both the ornament and the defence of a Christian. It is requisite in every situation, and in every enterprise; indeed nothing can be done well without it. The want of sobriety is seen and felt by multitudes every day. Without sobriety a man is exposed to the tossing of the merciless waves, destitute of an anchor. Sobriety is a security against the baneful influence of turbulent passions; it is self-possession; it is self-defence. It is necessary on all occasions: when we read, when we hear, when we pray, when we converse, when we form schemes, when we pursue them, when we prosper, when we fail. Sobriety is necessary for all descriptions of character; it is necessary for the young and for the old; for the rich and the poor, for the wise and for the illiterate; all need to 'be sober.' The necessity of sobriety is obvious, 1. In our inquiries after truth, as opposed to presumption.--2. In our pursuit of this world, as opposed to covetousness.--3. In the use and estimate of the things of this world, as opposed to excess.--4. In trials and afflictions, as opposed to impatience.--5. In forming our judgment of others, as opposed to censoriousness.--6. In speaking of one's self, as opposed to egotism.--Many motives might be urged to this exercise, as, 1. The general language of Scripture, 1 Pet. v. 8. Phil. iv. 5. Tit. ii. 12. 1 Pet. iv. 7.--2. Our profession as Christians.--3. The example of Jesus Christ, and 4. The near approach of death and judgment." See DRUNKENNESS, MODERATION.
A sect so called from Faustus Socinus, who died
in Poland in 1604. There were two who bore the name Socinus, uncle and nephew,
and both disseminated the same doctrine; but it is the nephew who is generally
considered as the founder of this sect. They maintain "that Jesus Christ was
a mere man, who had no existence before he was conceived by the Virgin Mary;
that the Holy Ghost is no distinct person; but that the Father is truly and
properly God. They own that the name of God is given in the holy Scriptures to
Jesus Christ, but contend that it is only a deputed title, which, however,
invests him with a great authority over all created beings. They deny the
doctrines of satisfaction and imputed righteousness, and say, that Christ only
preached the truth to mankind, set before them in himself an example of heroic
virtue, and sealed his doctrines with his blood. Original sin and absolute
predestination they esteem scholastic chimeras. Some of them likewise maintain
the sleep of the soul, which, they say, becomes insensible at death, and is raised
again with the body at the resurrection, when the good shall be established in
the possession of eternal felicity, while the wicked shall be consigned to a
fire that will not torment them eternally, but for a certain duration
proportioned to their demerits."
There is some difference, however, between
ancient and modern Socinians. The latter, indignant at the name Socinian, have
appropriated to themselves that of Unitarians, and reject the notions of a
miraculous conception and the worship of Christ; both which were held by
Socinus. Dr. Priestly has laboured hard in attempting to defend this doctrine
of the Unitarians, but Dr. Horsley, bishop of Rochester, has ably refuted the
doctor in his Theological Tracts, which are worthy the perusal of every Christian,
and especially every candidate for the ministry.
Dr. Price agreed with the Socinians in the main,
yet his system was somewhat different. He believed in the pre-existence of
Christ, and likewise that he was more than a human being; and took upon him
human nature for a higher purpose than merely revealing to mankind the will of
God, and instructing them in their duty and in the doctrines of religion.
The Socinians flourished greatly in Poland about
the year 1551: and J. Siemienius, palatine of Podolia, built purposely for
their use the city of Racow. A famous catechism was published, called the
Racovian catechism: and their most able writers are known by the title of the
Polones Fratres, or Polonian Brethren. Their writings were re-published
together, in the year 1656, in one great collection, consisting of six volumes
in folio, under the title of Bibliotheca Fratrum. An account of these authors
may be seen in Dr. Toulmin's Life of Socinus. Some of the writers on the
Socinian doctrine, besides the above-mentioned, have been, Haynes in his
Scripture Account of the Attributes and Worship of God, and of the Character
and Offices of Jesus Christ; Dr. Lardner on the Logos; Priestly's Hist. of
early Opinions and Disquisitions; Lindsay in his Historical View of
Unitarianism; Carpenter's Unitarianism; and Belsham's Answer to Wilberforce.
Against the Socinian doctrine may be consulted, Dr. Horne's Sermon on the Duty
of contending for the Faith; Dr. Owen against Biddle; Dr. Hornbeck's
Confutation of Socinianism; Calovius's Ditto; Macgowan's Socinianism brought to
the Test; and books under articles ARIANS and JESUS CHRIST.
So called from their leader, one Soldin a Greek
priest. They appeared about the middle of the fifth century in the kingdoms of
Saba and Godolia. They altered the manner of the sacrifice of the mass; their
priests offered gold, their deacons incense, and their sub-deacons myrrh; and
this in memory of the like offerings made to the infant Jesus by the wise men.
Very few authors mention the Soldins, neither do
we know whether they still subsist.
Those who rest on faith alone for salvation, without any connexion with works; or who judge themselves to be Christ's because they believe they are.
A term applied in the Scriptures not only to magistrates and saints, but more particularly to Jesus Christ. Christ, says Bishop Pearson, has a fourfold right to this title. 1. By generation, as begotten of God, Luke. i. 35.--2. By commission, as sent by him, John x. 34, 36.--3. By resurrection, as the first born, Acts xiii. 32, 33.--4. By actual possession, as heir of all, Heb. i. 2, 5. But, besides these four, many think that he is called the Son of God in such a way and manner as never any other was, is, or can be, because of his own divine nature, he being the true, proper, and natural Son of God, begotten by him before all worlds, John iii. 16. Rom. viii. 3. 1 John iv. 9. See article GENERATION ETERNAL, and books there referred to.
Magic, conjuration. See CHARMS and WITCHCRAFT.
Uneasiness or grief, arising from the privation of some good we actually possessed. It is the oposite to joy. Though sorrow may be allowable under a sense of sin, and when involved in troubles, yet we must beware of an extreme. Sorrow, indeed, becomes sinful and excessive when it leads us to slight our mercies; causes us to be insensible to public evils; when it diverts us from duty; so oppresses our bodies as to endanger our lives; sours the spirit with discontent, and makes us inattentive to the precepts of God's word, and advice of our friends. In order to moderate our sorrows, we should consider that we are under the direction of a wise and merciful Being; that he permits no evil to come upon us without a gracious design; that he can make our troubles sources of spiritual advantage; that he might have afflicted us in a far greater degree; that, though he has taken some, yet he has left many other comforts; that he has given many promises of relief: thet he has supported thousands in as great troubles as ours: and, finally, that the time is coming when he will wipe away all tears, and give to them that love him a crown of glory that fadeth not away. See RESIGNATION.
That vital, immaterial, active substance, or
principle, in man, whereby he perceives, remembers, reasons, and wills. It is
rather to be described as to its operations, than to be defined as to its essence.
Various, indeed, have been the opinions of philosophers concerning its
substance. The Epicureans thought it a subtile air, composed of atoms, or
primitive corpuscles. The Stoics maintained it was a flame, or portion of
heavenly light. The Cartesians make thinking the essence of the soul. Some hold
that man is endowed with three kinds of soul, viz. the rational, which is
purely spiritual, and infused by the immediate inspiration of God: the
irrational or sensitive, which being common to man and brutes, is supposed to
be formed of the elements: and, lastly, the vegetative soul, or principle of
growth and nutrition, as the first is of understanding, and the second of
animal life.
The rational soul is simple, uncompounded, and
immaterial, not composed of matter and form; for matter can never think and
move of itself as the soul does. In the fourth volume of the Memoirs of the
Literacy and Philosophical Society of Manchester, the reader will find a very
valuable paper, by Dr. Ferrier, proving by evidence apparently complete, that
every part of the brain has been injured without affecting the act of thought.
It will be difficult for any man to peruse this without being convinced that
the modern theory of the Materialists is shaken from its very foundation.
The immortality of the soul may be argued from
its vast capacities, boundless desires, great improvements, dissatisfaction
with the present state, and desire of some kind of religion. It is also argued
from the consent of all nations; the consciousness that men have of sinning;
the sting of conscience; the justice and providence of God. How far these
arguments are conclusive I will not say; but the safest, and, in fact, the only
sure ground to go upon to prove this doctrine is the word of God, where we at
once see it clearly established, Matt. x. 28. Matt. xxv. 46. Dan. xii. 2. 2
Tim. i. 10. 1 Thess. iv. 17, 18. John x. 28. But as this article belongs rather
to metaphysics than to theology, we refer the reader to A. Baxter on the Soul;
Locke on the Understanding; Watts's Ontology; Jackson on Matter and Spirit;
Flavel on the Soul; More's Immortality of the Soul; Hartley on Man; Bp.
Porteus's Sermons, ser. 5, 6, 7. vol. i.; Doddridge's Lectures, lec. 92, 93,
94, 95, 96, 97; Drew's Essay on the Immateriality and Immortality of the Soul.
Care of the Soul. See CARE.
The followers of Joanna Southcot, well known at
this time in the south of England as a prophetess.
The book in which Joanna published her
prophecies, is dated London, April 25, 1804; and she begins by declaring she
herself did not understand the communications given her by the Spirit, till
they were afterwards explained to her. In November 1803, she was told to mark
the weather during the twenty-four first days of the succeeding year, and then
the Spirit informs her that the weather each day was typical of the events of
each succeeding month: New year's day to correspond with January, January 2
with February, &c.
After this she relates a dream she had in 1792,
and declares she foretold the death of Bishop Buller, and appeals to a letter
put into the hands of a clergyman whom she names.
One night she heard a noise as if a ball of iron
was rolling down the stairs three steps; and the Spirit afterwards, she says,
told her this was a sign of three great evils which were to fall upon this
land, the sword, the plague, and the famine. She affirms that the late war, and
the extraordinary harvest of 1797 and 1800, happened agreeably to the
predictions which she had previously made known; and particularly appeals to
the people of Exeter, where it seems she was brought up from her infancy.
In November 1803, she says she was ordered to
open her Bible, which she did at Eccles. ch. i. 9; and then follows a long
explanation of that chapter.
When she was at Stockton upon Tees in the next
month, she informs us three methodist preachers had the confidence to tell her
she uttered lies; and she then refers them to four clergymen who could prove
she and her friends were not liars.
After this she gives us a long communication on
Gen. xlix. wherein Jacob warns his sons of what should befall them in the last
days, and which she applies to our present times. She then favours her readers
with a long ESSAY on the marriage of the Lamb, and as variety is always
pleasing, it commences in sober prose, but ends in jingling rhyme.
The following is the conclusion of a
communication which she had at Stockfort: "As wrong as they are, saying thou
hast children brought up by the parish, and that thou art Bonaparte's brother,
and that thou hast been in prison; so false is their sayings, thy writings came
from the devil or any spirit but the SPITIT OF THE LIVING GOD; and that every
soul in this nation shall know before the FIVE YEARS I mentioned to thee in
1802 are expired; and then I will turn as a DIADEM of beauty to the residence
of my people, and they shall praise the GOD OF THEIR SALVATION."
In March 1805, we find Joanna published a pamphlet
in London, endeavouring to confute "FIVE CHARGES" against her, which
had appeared in the Leeds Mercury, and four of which she says were absolutely
false. The first charge was respecting the sealing of her disciples. The second
on the invasion. The third on the famine. The fourth on her mission. The fifth
on her death. Sealing is the grand peculiarity and ordinance of these people.
Joanna gives those who profess belief in her mission, and will subscribe to the
things revealed in her "WARNING," a sealed written paper with her
signature, and by which they are led to think they are sealed against the day
of redemption, and that all those who are possessed of these seals will be
signally honoured by the Messiah when he comes this spring. It is said they looked
upon Joanna to be the bride, the Lamb's wife; and that as man fell by a woman,
he will be restored by a woman. Some of her followers pretended also to have
visions and revelations. At present, it seems, both warning and sealing have
subsided; they are waiting, probably in awful suspense, for the commencement of
the thousand years' reign on the earth, when peace will universally prevail.
Yet it is said they do not mean that Christ will come in person, but in spirit,
and that the sealed who are dead before this time, will be raised from their
graves to partake in this happy state.
Is his power and right of dominion over his creatures, to dispose and determine them as seemeth him good. This attribute is evidently demonstrated in the systems of creation, providence, and grace; and may be considered as absolute, universal, and everlasting, Dan. iv. 35. Eph. i. 11. SeeDOMINION, GOVERNMENT, POWER, and WILL OF GOD; Coles on the Sovereignty of God; and Charnock on the Dominion of God, in his Works, vol. i. p. 690; Edwards's Sermons, ser. 4.
The doctrines of Spinoza, who was born a Jew at Amsterdam in 1632. The chief articles in his system are such as these: that there is but one substance in nature, and that this only substance is endued with an infinite variety of attributes, among which are extension and cogitation; that all the bodies in the universe are modifications of this substance, considered as extended: and that all the souls of men are modifications of the same substance, considered as cogitative: that God is a necessary and infinitely perfect Being, and is the cause of all things that exist, but not a different Being from them: that there is but one Being, and one nature; and that this nature produces within itself, by an immanent act, al those which we call creatures; and that this Being is, at the same time, both agent and patient, efficient cause and subject, but that he produces nothing but modifications of himself. Thus is the Deity made the sole agent as well as patient, in all evil, both physical and moral. If this impious doctrine be not Atheism (or, as it is sometimes called, Pantheism,) I know not what is. See PANTHEISM.
An incorporeal being or intelligence; in which sense God is said to be a Spirit, as are angels and the human soul.
See HOLY GHOST.
Is his immateriality, or being without body. It expresses an idea (says Dr. Paley) made up of a negative part and of a positive part. The negative part consists in the exclusion of some of the known properties of matter, especially of solidity, and the vis inertiae, and of gravitation. The positive part comprises perception, thought, will, power, action, by which last term is meant the origination of motion. Nat. Theol. p. 481. See INCORPOREALITY OF GOD.
That disposition implanted in the mind by the Holy Spirit, by which it is inclined to love, delight in, and attend to spiritual things. The spiritual minded highly appreciate spiritual blessings--are engaged in spiritual exercises--pursue spiritual objects--are influenced by spiritual motives--and experience spiritual joys. To be spiritually-minded, says St. Paul, is life and peace, Rom. viii. 6. See Dr. Owen's excellent Treatise on this subject.
Are those persons who, in the office of baptism, answer, or are sureties for the persons baptised. See GODFATHERS.
Book of, a book or declaration drawn up by Bp.
Morton, in the reign of K. James I. to encourage recreations and sports on the
Lord's day. It was to this effect: "That for his good people's recreation
his Majesty's pleasure was, that, after the end of divine service, they should
not be disturbed, letted, or discouraged, from any lawful recreations; such as
dancing, either of men or women; archery for men; leaping, vaulting, or any
such harmless recreations; nor having of may-games, whitsonales, or morrice dances;
or setting up of May poles, and other sports therewith used, so as the same may
be had in due and convenient time, without impediment or let of divine service;
and that women should have leave to carry rushes to the church for the
decorating of it, according to their old customs; withal prohibiting all
unlawful games to be used on Sundays only; as bear-baiting, bull-baiting,
interludes, and at all times (in the meaner sort of people prohibited)
bowling." Two or three restraints were annexed to the declaration, which
deserve the reader's notice: 1st. "No recusant (i.e. Papist) was to have
the benefit of this declaration.--2dly. Nor such as were not present at the
whole of divine service.--Nor, 3dly. such as did not keep to their own parish
churches that is, Puritans."
This declaration was ordered to be read in all
the parish churches of Lancashire, which aboun with Papists; and Wilson adds,
that it was to have been read in all the churches of England, but that
Archbishop Abbot, being at Croydon, flatly forbade its being read there. In the
reign of King Charles I. Archbishop Laud put the king upon republishing this
declaration, which was accordingly done. The court had their balls,
masquerades, and plays, on the Sunday evenings, while the youth of the country
were at their morrice-dances, May-gmes, church and clerk ales, and all such
kind of revelling. The severe pressing of this declaration made sad havoc among
the Puritans, as it was to be read in the churches. Many poor clergymen
strained their consciences in submission to their superiors. Some, after
publishing it, immediately read the fourth commandment to the
people:--"Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy:" adding,
"The injunction of man." Some put it upon their curates, whilst great
numbers absolutely refused to comply: the consequence of which was, that
several clergymen were actually suspended for not reading it.--Such, alas, was
the awful state of the times!
Or the law of the six articles; a law enacted in the reign of Henry VIII. which denounced death against all those who should deny the doctrine of transubstantiation; or maintain the necessity of receiving the sacrament in both kinds, or affirm that it was lawful for priests to marry, that vows of celibacy might be broken, that private masses were of no avail, and that auricular confession to a priest was not necessary to salvation.
See CONSTANCY.
Heathen philosophers, who took their names from
the Greek word stoa, signifying a porch, or portico, because Zeno, the head of
the Stoics, kept his school in a porch of the city of Athens. It is supposed
that Zeno borrowed many of his opinions from the Jewish Scriptures; but it is
certain that Socrates and Plato had taught much of them before. The Stoics
generally maintained that nature impels every man to pursue whatever appears to
him to be good. According to them, self-preservation and defence is the first
law of animated nature. All animals necessarily derive pleasure from those
things which are suited to them; but the first object of pursuit is not
pleasure, but conformity to nature. Every ne, therefore, who has a right
discernment of what is good, will be chiefly concerned to conform to nature in
all his actions and pursuits. This is the origin of moral obligation. With
respect to happiness or good, the stoical doctrine was altogether extravagant:
they taught that all external things are indifferent and cannot affect the
happiness of man; that pain, which does not belong to the mind, is not evil;
and that a wise man will be happy in the midst of torture, because virtue
itself is happiness.
Of all the sects however of the ancient
philosophers, it is said that the Stoics came nearest the Christian; and that
not only with respect to their strict regard to moral virtue, but also on
account of their moral principles; insomuch, that Jerome affirms that in many
things they agree with us. They asserted the unity of the Divine Being--the
creation of the world by the Word--the doctrine of Providence--and the
conflagration of the universe. They believed in the doctrine of fate, which
they represented as no other than the will and purpose of God, and held that it
had no tendency to looseness of life.
Pillar saints; an appellation given to a kind of
solitaries, who stood motionless upon the tops of pillars, raised for the
exercise of their patience, and remained there for several years, amidst the
admiration and applause of the stupid populace. Of these, we find several
mentioned in ancient writers, and even as low as the twelfth century, when they
were totally suppressed.
The founder of the order was St. Simeon Stylites,
a famous anchoret in the fifth century, who first took up his abode on a column
six cubits high; then on a second of twelve cubits; a third of twenty-two; a
fourth of thirty-six; and on another of forty cubits, where he thus passed
thirty-seven years of his life. The tops of these columns were only three feet
in diameter, and were defended by a rail that reached almost to the girdle,
somewhat resembling a pulpit. There was no lying down in it. The Faquirs or
devout people of the East, imitate this extraordinary kind of life to this day.
An inferior minister, who anciently attended at the altar, prepared the sacred vessels, delivered them to the deacons in time of divine service, attended the doors of the church during communion service, went on the bishop's embassies with his letters, or messages, to foreign churches, and was invested with the first of the holy orders. They were so subordinate to the superior rules of the church, that, by a canon of the council of Laodicea, they were forbidden to sit in the presence of a deacon without his leave.
Those who hold that God permitted the first man to fall into transgression without absolutely predetermining his fall; or that the decree of predestination regards man as fallen, by an abuse of that freedom which Adam had, into a state in which all were to be left to necessary and unavoidable ruin, who were not exempted from it by predestination. See SUPRALAPSARRIANS.
Implies an entire giving up our understanding, will, and affections, to him; or, as Dr. Owen observes, it consists in 1. An acquiescency in his right and severeignty.--2. An acknowledgment of his righteousness and wisdom.--3. A sense of his love and care.--4. A diligent application of ourselves to his mind and will.--5. Keeping our souls by faith and patience from wearniness and despondancy.--6. A full resignation to his will. See RESIGNATION, SORROW.
Subscription to articles of religion is required
of the clergy of every established church, and of some churches not
established. But it has been a matter of dispute whether it answers any
valuable purpose as to religion, however necessary as a test to loyalty. All
language is more or less ambiguous, so that it is difficult always to
understand the exact sense, or the animus imponintis, especially when creeds
have been long established. It is said that the clergy of the churches of
England and Scotland seldom consider themselves as fettered with the Thirty-nine
Articles, or the Confession of Faith, when composing instructions for their
parishes, or the public at large.
It is to be feared, indeed, that many subscribe
merely for the sake of emolument; and though it be professedly ex animo, it is
well known that it is not so in reality. How such will answer to the Great Head
of the church, we must leave them to judge. They who think subscription to be
proper, should remember that it approaches very near the solemnity of an oath,
and is not to be trifled with. "Great care," says Doddridge,
"ought to be taken that we subscribe nothing that we do not firmly
believe. If the signification of the words be dubious, and we believe either
sense, and that sense in which we do believe them is as natural as the other,
we may, consistently with integrity, subscribe them; or if the sense in which
we do believe them to be less natural, and we explain that sense, and that
explication be admitted by the person requiring the subscription in his own
right, there can be no just foundation for a scruple. Some have added, that, if
we have reason to believe (though it is not expressly declared) that he who
imposes the subscription does not intend that we should hereby declare our
assent to those articles, but only that we should pay a compliment to his
authority, and engage ourselves not openly to contradict them, we may, in this
case, subscribe what it most directly contrary to our belief; or that, if we
declare our belief in any book, as, for instance, the Bible, it is to be
supposed that we subscribe other articles only so far as they are consistent
with that; because we cannot imagine that the law would require us to profess
our belief of contrary propositions at the same time. But subscription upon
these principles seems a very dangerous attack upon sincerity and public
virtue, especially in those designed for public offices." If the reader be
desirous of investigating the subject, he may consult, Paley's Mor. Phil. vol.
i. p. 218; Dyer on Subscription; Doddridge's Lect. lect. 70; Conybeare's Sermon
on Subscription; Free and Candid Disquisitions relating to the Church of
England; and the Confessional.
A term made use of by the Romanists, and others, in reference to those bishops who are supposed to have derived their authority from the apostles, and so communicated that authority to others in a line, or succession. It is a very precarious and uncomfortable foundation for Christian hope (says Dr. Doddridge) which is laid in the doctrine of an uninterrupted succession of bishops, and which makes the validity of the administration of Christian ministers depend upon such a succession, since there is so great a darkness upon many periods of ecclesiastical history, insomuch that it is not agreed who were the seven first bishops of the church of Rome, though that church was so celebrated; and Eusebius himself, from whom the greatest patrons of this doctrine have made their catalogues, expressly owns that it is no easy matter to tell who succeeded the apostles in the government of the churches, excepting such as may be collected from St. Paul's own words. (See EPISCOPACY.) Contested elections, in almost all considerable cities, make it very dubious which were the true bishops; and decrees of councils, rendering all those ordinations null where any sinoniacal contract, was the foundation of them, makes it impossible to prove that there is now upon earth any one person who is a legal successor of the apostles; at least according to the principles of the Romish church. Consequently, whatever system is built on this doctrine must be very precarious. Howe's Episcopacy, p. 170, 183; Doddridge's Lec. lec. 197; Chandler's Sermons against Popery p. 34-37; Pierce's Sermons, pref. and article ORDINATION.
To form an idea of Christ's sufferings, we should consider the poverty of his birth; the reproach of his character; the pains of his body; the power of his enemies; the desertion of his friends; the weight of his people's sins; the slow, ignominious, and painful nature of his death; and the hidings of his Father's face. All these rendered his sufferings extremely severe; yet some heretics said, that the sufferings of Christ were only in appearance, and not real: but, as Bishop Pearson observes, "If hunger and thirst; if revilings and contempt; if sorrows and agonies; if stripes and buffeting; if condemnation and crucifixion, be sufferings, Jesus suffered. If the infirmities of our nature; if the weight of our sins; if the malice of men; if the machinations of Satan; if the hand of God, could make him suffer, our Saviour suffered. If the annals of time; if the writings of the apostles; if the death of his martyrs; if the confession of Gentiles; if the scoffs of the Jews, be testimonies, Jesus suffered." Pearson on the Creed; Dr. Rambach's Meditations on the Sufferings of Christ. For the end of Christ's sufferings, see DEATH OF CHRIST.
Or the LORD'S DAY, a solemn festival observed by
Christians on the first day of every week in memory of our Saviour's
resurrection. See SABBATH.
It has been contended whether Sunday is a name
that ought to be used by Christians. The words Sabbath and Lord's Day, say
some, are the only names mentioned in Scripture respecting this day. To call it
Sunday, is to set our wisdom before the wisdom of God, and to give that glory
to a Pagan idol which is due to him alone. The ancient Saxons called it by this
name, because upon it they worshipped the Sun; and shall Christians keep up the
memory of that which was highly displeasing to God, by calling the Sabbath by
that name rather than by either of those he hath appointed? It is, indeed, called
Sunday, only because it is customary: but this, say they, will not justify men
in doing that which is contrary to the example and command of God in his word.
Others observe, that although it was originally
called Sunday, by the Heathens, yet it may very properly retain that name among
Christians, because it is dedicated to the honour of the true light, which
lighteth every man that cometh into the world, of Him who is styled by the
prophet "the Sun of Righteousness," and who on this day arose from
the dead. But although it was in the primitive times indifferently called the
Lord's Day, or Sunday, yet it was never denominated the Sabbath; a name
constantly appropriate to Saturday or the seventh day, both by the sacred and
ecclesiastical writers. See SABBATH.
What a man does beyond his duty, or more than he
is commanded to do. The Romanists stand up strenuously for works of
supererogation, and maintain that the observance of evangelical councils is
such. By means hereof a stock of merit is laid up, which the church has the
disposal of, and which she distributes in indulgences to such as need.
This absurd doctrine was first invented towards
the close of the twelfth century, and modified and embellished by St. Thomas in
the thirteenth: according to which, it was pretended that there actually
existed an immense treasure of merit, composed of the pious deeds and virtuous
actions which the saints had performed beyond what was necessary for their own
salvation, and which were, therefore, applicable to the benefit of others; that
the guardian and dispenser of this precious treasure was the Roman pontiff; and
that, of consequence, he was empowered to assign to such as he thought proper,
a portion of this inexhaustible source of merit, suitable to their respective
guilt, and sufficient to deliver them from the punishment due to their crimes.
An ecclesiastical superior in several reformed churches where episcopacy is not admitted, particularly among the Lutherans in Germany, and the Calvinists in some other places. The superintendent is similar to a bishop, only his power is somewhat more restrained than that of our diocesan bishops. He is the chief pastor, and has the direction of all the inferior pastors within his district or diocess.
Is a word that has been used so indefinitely,
that it is difficult to determine its precise meaning. From its resemblance in
sound to the Latin word superstes, a survivor, it is evidently derived from it;
and different attempts have been made to trace their connexion in
signification, but without any degree of certainty. It is generally defined to
be, the observance of unnecessary and uncommanded rites and practices in
religion; reverence of objects not fit for worship; too great nicety, fears, or
scrupulousness; or extravagant devotions; or religion wrong directed or
conducted. The word may be applied to the idolatry of the Heathens, the
traditions of the Jews, the unscriptural rites of the Catholics; to the
dependence placed by many on baptism, the Lord's supper, and other ceremonies.
It may be extended to those, who, without any evidence, believe that prophecies
are still uttered, or miracles are performed. It is also applied to those who
believe in witchraft, magic, omens, &c.
Superstition, says Claude, usually springs
either, 1. From servile fear, which makes people believe that God is always
wrathful, and invents means to appease him.--2. Or from a natural inclination
we all have to idolatry, which makes men think they see some ray of the
Divinity in extraordinary creatures, and on this account worship them.--Or, 3.
From hypocrisy, which makes men willing to discharge their obligations to God
by grimace, and by zeal for external services.--Or, 4. From presumption, which
makes men serve God after their own fancies. Claude's Essay on the Composition
of a Sermon, vol. ii. p. 49 and 299; Saurin's Sermons vol. v. p. 49, Eng. edit.
Gregory's Essays, essay iii.
Persons who hold that God, without any regard to
the good or evil works of men, has resolved, by an eternal decree, supra
lapsum, antecedently to any knowledge of the fall of Adam, and independently of
it, to save some and reject others: or, in other words, that God intended to
glorify his justice in the condemnation of some, as well as his mercy in the
salvation of others; and, for that purpose, decreed that Adam, should
necessarily fall.
Cr. Gill gives us the following account of
Supralapsarianism.--The question which he proposes to discuss, is,
"Whether men were considered in the mind of God in the decree of election
as fallen or unfallen, as in the corrupt mass through the fall, or in the pure
mass of creatureship, previous to it, and as to be created?" There are
some who think that the latter, so considered, were the objects of election in
the divine mind. These are called Supralapsarians, though of these, some are of
opinion that man was considered as to be created or creatable, and others as
created but not fallen. the former seems best, that, of the vast number of
individuals which came up in the divine mind whom his power could create, those
whom he meant to bring into being he designed to glorify himself by them in
some way or other. The decree of election respecting any part of them, may be
distinguished into the decree of the end and the decree of the means. The
decree of the end respecting some is either subordinate to their eternal
happiness, or ultimate, which is more properly the end, the glory of God; and
if both are put together, it is a state of everlasting communion with God, for
the glorifying of the riches of his grace. The decree of the means includes the
decree to create men to permit them to fall, to recover them out of it through
redemption by Christ, to sanctify them by the grace of the Spirit, and
completely save them; and which are not to be reckoned as materially many
decrees, but as making one formed decree; or they are not to be considered as
subordinate, but as co-ordinate means, and as making up one entire complete
medium; for it is not to be supposed that God decreed to create man, that he
might permit him to fall, in order to redeem, sanctify, and save him; but he
decreed all this that he might glorify his grace, mercy, and justice. And in
this way of considering the decrees of God, they think that they sufficiently
obviate and remove the slanderous calumny cast upon them with respect to the
other branch of predestination, which leaves men in the same state when others
are chosen, and that for the glory of God. Which calumny is, that, according to
them, God made man to damn him; whereas, according to their real sentiments,
God decreed to make man, and made man neither to damn him nor save him, but for
his own glory, which end is answered in them some way or other.--Again; they
argue that the end is first in view before the means, and the decree of the end
is, in order of nature, before the decree of the means; and what is first in
intention, is last in execution. Now, as the glory of God is last in execution,
it must be first in intention, wherefore men must be considered in the decree
of the end as not yet created and fallen; since the creation and permission of
sin belong to the decree of the means, which in order of nature is after the
decree of the end. And they add to this, that if God first decreed to create
man, and suffered him to fall, and then out of the fall chose some to grace and
glory, he must decree to create man without an end, which is to make God to do
what no wise man would; for when a man is about to do any thing, he proposes an
end, and then contrives and fixes on ways and means to bring about that end.
They think also that this way on conceiving and speaking of these things, best
expresses the sovereignty of God in them, as declared in the 9th of Romans,
where he is said to will such and such things, for no other reason but because
he wills them.
The opponents of this doctrine consider, however,
that it is attended with insuperable difficulties. We demand, say they, an
explanation of what they mean by this principle. "God hath made all things
for his own glory." If they mean that justice requires a creature to
devote himself to the worship and glorifying of his Creator, we grant it; if
they mean that the attributes of God are displayed in all his works, we grant
this too: but if the proposition be intended to affirm that God had no other
view in creating men, so to speak, than his own interest, we deny the
proposition, and affirm that God created men for their own happiness, and in order
to have subjects upon whom he might bestow favours.
We desire to be informed, in the next place, say
they, how it can be conceived that a determination to damn millions of men can
contribute to the glory of God? We easily conceive, that it is for the glory of
divine justice to punish guilty men: but to resolve to damn men without the
consideration of sin, to create them that they might sin, to determine that
they should sin in order to their destruction, is what seems to us more likely
to tarnish the glory of God than to display it.
Again; we demand how, according to this
hypothesis, it can be conceived that God is not the author of sin? In the
general scheme of our churches, God only permits men to sin, and it is the
abuse of liberty that plunges man into misery: even this principle, all
lenified as it seems, is yet subject to a great number of difficulties; but in
this scheme, God wills sin to produce the end he proposed in creating the
world, and it was necessary that men should sin: God created them for that. If
this be not to make God tha author of sin, we must renounce the most distinct
and clear ideas.
Again; we require them to reconcile this system
with many express declarations of Scripture, which inform us that God would
have al men to be saved. How doth it agree with such pressing entreaties, such
cutting reproofs, such tender expostulations, as God discovers in regard to the
unconverted? Matt. xxiii. 37.
Lastly, we desire to know, how is it possible to
conceive a God, who, being in the actual enjoyment of perfect happiness,
incomprehensible, and supreme, could determine to add this decree, though
useless, to his felicity, to create men without number for the purpose of
confining them for ever in the chains of darkness, and burning them for ever in
unquenchable flames. Gill's Body of Div. vol. i. p. 299; Brine's works;
Saurin's Sermons, vol. v. p. 336. Eng. trans.
A doctrine held by the Roman Catholics, who believe that the bishop of Rome is, uner Christ, supreme pastor of the whole church; and, as such, is not only the first bishop in order and dignity, but has also a power and jurisdiction over all Christians. This doctrine is chiefly built upon the suposed primacy of St. Peter, of whom the bishop of Rome is the pretended successor; a primacy we no where find commanded or countenanced, but absolutely prohibited, in the word of God, Luke xxii. 14, 24. Mark ix. 35. See INFALLIBILITY, PRIMACY, POPE, and POPERY; Dr. Barrow's Treatise on the Pope's Supremacy; Chillingworth's Religion of the Protestants; and Smith's Errors of the Church of Rome.
See OATH.
Consists in imagining evil of others without proof. It is sometimes opposed to charity, which thinketh no evil. "A suspicious temper checks in the bud every kind affection; it hardens the heart, and estranges man from man. What friendship can we expect from him who views all our conduct with distrustful eyes, and ascribes every benefit we confer to artifice and stratagem? A candid man is accustomed to view the characters of his neighbours in the most favourable light, and is like one who dwells amidst those beautiful scenes of nature on which the eye rests with pleasure. Whereas the suspicious man, having his imagination filled with all the shocking forms of human falsehood, deceit, and treachery, resembles the traveller in the wilderness, who discerns no objects around him but what are either dreary or terrible; caverns that open, serpents that hiss, and beasts of prey that howl."
See OATH.
Cursing and Swearing is an offence against God
and religion, and a sin of al others the most extravagant and unaccountable, as
having no benefit or advantage attending it. It is a contempt of God; a
violation of his law; a great breach of good behaviour; and a mark of levity,
weakness, and wickedness. How those who live in the habitual practice of it can
call themselves men of sense, of character, or of decency, I know not. By the
last statute against this crime, 19 George II. which repeals all former ones,
every labourer, sailor, or soldier, profanely cursing or swearing, shall
forfeit one shilling; every other person, under the rank of a gentleman, two
shillings; and every gentleman, or person of superior rank, five shillings, to
the poor of the parish; and on a second convictin, double, and for every
subsequent offence treble the sum first forfeited, with all charges of
conviction; and, in default of payment, shall be sent to the house of
correction for ten days.
The followers of Emanuel Swedenborg, a Swedish
nobleman, born at Stockholm in 1689. He apears to have had a good education;
for his learning was extensive in almost every branch. He professed himself to
be the founder of the New Jerusalem Church, alluding to the New Jerusalem
spoken of in the book of the Revelation. Sh asserts that, in the year 1743, the
Lord manifested himself to him by a personal apearance, and at the same time
opened his spiritual eyes, so that he was enabled constantly to see and
converse with spirits and angels. From that time he began to print and publish
various wonderful things, which, he says, were revealed to him, relating to
heaven and hell, the state of men after death, the worship of God, the spiritual
sense of the Scriptures, the various earths in the universe, and their
inhabitants; with many other strange particulars.
Swedenborg lived and died in the Lutheran
communion, but always professed the highest respect for the church of England.
He carried his respect for the person and divinity of Jesus Christ to the
highest point of veneration, considering him altogether as "Godmanifested
in the flesh, and as the fulness of the Godhead united to the man Christ
Jesus." With respect, therefore, to the sacred Trinity, though he rejected
the idea of three distinct persons as destructive of the unity of the Godhead,
he admitted three distinct essences, principles, or characters, as existing in
it; namely, the divine essence or character, in virtue of which he is called
the Father or Creator; the human essence, principle, or character, united to
the divine in the person of Jesus Christ, in virtue of which he is called the
Son and Redeemer; and, lastly, the proceeding essence or principle, in virtue
of which he is called the Holy Ghost. He farther maintains, that the sacred
Scripture contains three distinct senses, called celestial, spiritual, and
natural, which are united by correspondences; and that in each sense it is
divine truth accommodated respectively to the angels of the three heavens, and
also to men on earth. This science of correspondence (it is said) has been lost
for some thousands of years, viz. ever since the time of Job, but is now
revived by Emanuel Swedenborg, who uses it as a key to the spiritual or
internal sense of the sacred Scripture; every page of which, he says, is
written by correspondence, that is, by such things in the natural world as
correspondent unto and signify things in the spiritual world. He denies the
doctrine of atonement, or vicarious sacrifice; together with the doctrines of
predestination, unconditional election, justification by faith alone, the
resurrection of the material body, &c. and, in opposition thereto,
maintains that man is possessed of free will in spiritual things; that
salvation is not attainable without repentance, that is, abstaining from evils,
because they are sins against God, and living a life of charity and faith,
according to the commandments; that man, immediately on his decease, rises
again in a spiritual body, which was enclosed in his material body; and that in
this spiritual body he lives as a man to eternity, either in heaven or in hell,
according to the quality of his past life. That all those passages in the
Scripture generally supposed to signify the destruction of the world by fire,
and commonly called the last judgment, must be understood according to the
above-mentioned science of correspondences, which teaches, that by the end of
the world, or consummation of the age, is not signified the destruction of the
world, but the destruction or end of the present Christian church, both among
Roman Catholics and Protestants, of every description or denomination; and that
this last judgment actually took place in the spiritual world in the year 1757;
from which aera is dated the second advent of the Lord, and the commencement of
a new Christian church, which, they say, is meant by the new heaven and new
earth in the Revelation, and the New Jerusalem thence descending. They use a
liturgy, and instrumental as well as vocal music, in their public worship.
Summary View of Swedenborg's Doctrines; Swedenborg's Works; Dialogues on
Swedenborg's Theological Writings.
An abstract or compendium; a sign or representation of something moral by the figures or properties of natural things. Hence symbols are of various kinds; as hieroglyphics, types, enigmas, parables, fables, &c. See Dr. Lancaster's Dictionary of Scripture Symbols; and Bicheno's Symbolical Vocabulary in his Signs of the Times; Faber on the Prophecies; W. Jones's Works, vol. iv. let. 11.
A place where the Jews meet to worship God.
So called from the Greek which signifies co-operation. Hence this name was given to those in the sixteenth century who denied that God was the sole agent in the conversion of sinful man, and affirmed that man co-operated with divine grace in the accomplishment of this salutary purpose.
A meeting or assembly of ecclesiastical persons to consult on matters of religion. Of these there are four kinds, viz. 1. General, where bishops, &c. meet from all nations. These were first called by the emperors; afterwards by Christian princes; till in later ages, the pope usurped to himself the greatest share in this business, and by his legates presided in them when called.--2. National, where those of one nation only come together to determine any point of doctrine or discipline. The first of this sort which we read of in England was that of Herudford, or Hertford, in 673; and the last was that held by Cardinal Pole, in 1555.--3. Provincial, where those only of one province meet, now called the convocation.--4. Diocesan, where those of but one diocess meet, to enforce canons made by general councils, or national and provincial synods, and to consult and agree upon rules of discipline for themselves. those were not wholly laid aside, till by the act of submission, 25 Hen. VIII. c. 19. it was made unlawful for any synod to meet, but by royal authority. See COUNCIL and CONVOCATION.
the number of Syrian churches is greater than
has been supposed. There are, at this time, fifty-five churches in Malayala,
acknowledging the Patriarch of Antioch. The church was erected by the present
bishop, in 1793. See Evang. Mag. for 1807, p. 480.
The Syrian Christians are not Nestorians.
Formerly, indeed, they had bishops of that communion; but the liturgy of the
present church is derived from that of the early church of antioch, called
Liturgia Jacobi Apostoli. They are usually denominated Jarobitae; but they
differ in ceremonial from the church of that name in Syria, and indeed from any
existing church in the world. Their proper designation, and that which is
sanctioned by their own use, is, Syrian Christians, or the Syrian Church of
Malayala.
The doctrines of the Syrian church are contained
in a very few articles; and are not at variance, in essentials, with the
doctrines of the church of England.