Surely, was the Apostle Paul to rise from the dead, and read over, or hear of such strange positions, his spirit, as once at Athens, would again be stirred in him; to see a writer thus attempting to erect an altar for the public worship of an unknown God: I say, an unknown God. For how is it possible, in the very nature of the thing, for us, who are by nature carnal and sold under sin, ever to worship God, who is a spirit, in spirit and in truth, without some inward manifestations of grace and spiritual knowledge, superadded to the light of external revelation, to enable us so to do? For, to apply what this Apostle observes upon a like occasion, “he is not a real christian, who is only one outwardly; but he alone is a true christian, who is one inwardly, whose baptism is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not merely of the water, whose praise is not of man, but of God.” And yet (would you think it?) this writer is so unwary as to attempt to press this very Apostle, that true assertor of the doctrine of grace, that genuine, irrefragable vindicator of the offices and operations of the Holy Spirit, into his mistaken service. Never, I believe, were the saint and the scholar, the gentleman and the christian, more sweetly blended together, than in the character and writings of this favourite of heaven. How often, my dear friend, in our more retired moments, when conversing together concerning the lively oracles of God, have you called upon me to take notice of this truly great man’s pertinent and powerful preaching before Felix the governor, as well as his inexpressibly polite and persuasive address to King Agrippa? And how have you again and again read over to me, and made remarks upon, those striking images, and those divine characteristics, which this accomplished master of human and divine rhetoric lays before us, in the xiiith chapter of his first epistle to the Corinthians, of that most excellent grace charity, or the love of God? A grace so absolutely necessary to the christian life, that without it, to use the inimitable language of this inspired writer, “Though we had a miraculous faith, so as to remove mountains, nay though we should give all our goods to feed the poor, and even our bodies to be burnt, it would profit us nothing.” A grace that never faileth, but a sacred something of which we shall eternally remain possessed, and be increasing in, even when faith shall end in the vision, and hope in the endless fruition of the ever-blessed God. O my dear friend, how frequently have our hearts burned within us, under the glowing warmth of such an animating prospect? And yet, incredible as it may seem to you, I assure you, that this very chapter is singled out by our hapless Author, to prove, “That supernatural manifestations of grace and knowledge, and spiritual aids in spiritual distresses, were the miraculous gifts of the primitive church, and were totally withdrawn on its perfect establishment.” Surely a more pertinent one could not be selected out of the whole New Testament, to prove directly the contrary. For let any man impartially examine the glorious inseparable properties and concomitants of this divine grace and gift, CHARITY, recorded in this chapter, can he then make the least doubt, whether any person living, can possibly be possessed of this most excellent gift, without those very supernatural manifestations of grace and knowledge, and those divine influences of the Holy Spirit exceeding the powers of humanity, which this unhappy writer would fain persuade us are now abated or totally withdrawn. “Charity (says our Apostle) suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil, rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth, beareth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.” Now can human reason, with all its heights; can calm philosophy, with all its depths; or moral suasion, with all its insinuating arts; so much as pretend to kindle, much less to maintain and blow up into a settled habitual flame of holy fire, such a spark as this in the human heart? Sooner might one attempt to extinguish the most rapid and devouring flames, by reading a lecture upon the benefit of cold water; or reach out one’s presumptuous hand to create a new heaven and a new earth; than to dream of extinguishing those innate, fiery passions of envy, selfishness, or malice, which this charity or love of God is here said to militate against; or, to work or form the soul into any of those divine tempers here spoken of, as the genuine effects and fruits of the love of God. No, my dear friend, these are flowers not to be gathered in nature’s garden. They are exotics; planted originally in heaven, and in the great work of the new birth, are transplanted by the Holy Ghost, not only into the hearts of the first Apostles, or primitive christians, but into the hearts of all true believers, even to the end of the world. For doubtless of all such St. Paul speaks, when he says, “Tribulation worketh patience, patience experience, experience hope, and hope maketh not ashamed, because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us.” And hence, doubtless, it is, that we were all in general, directed in one of the collects of our church, to “pray to that Lord who hath taught us, that all our doings without charity, are nothing worth, that he would send the Holy Ghost, and pour into our hearts that most excellent gift of charity.” So that, according to our reformers, supernatural influence and manifestations of grace and knowledge, are so far from being totally withdrawn, that, in the end of this very collect, they teach us to confess, that “without them,” or, which is the same, without the love of God poured into the heart by the Holy Ghost, “whosoever liveth, is counted dead before him.” But, if we will believe our Author, charity signifies little more than the outward establishment of the christian church, and consequently, that the Apostle means no more in this chapter than to shew us, “That prophecies, mysteries, knowledge,” (i. e. according to this writer, all supernatural knowledge) “were to cease when christianity arrived to a perfect establishment.” Page 82.—Nay, scorning to tread in the steps of Whitby, Hammond, Burkit, and every consistent spiritual expositor of holy writ, our new commentator, out of his paradoxical genius, labours to prove, that when the great Apostle asserts, that “charity never fails,” and therefore hath the preference over faith and hope, he means nothing less than to assert its eternal duration, and that consequently his true meaning hath hitherto escaped every unwary reader but himself, pages 75, 6, 7. Conscious, no doubt, of this singularity, and justly aware of its needing some apology, he very properly adds, page 82. that such an uncommon interpretation “instructs the unwary reader, with what caution and application he should come to the study of that profound reasoning with which all St. Paul’s epistles abound.” And may I not, at least with as great propriety subjoin, that this may also instruct every unwary reader, with what caution he should come to the study of that profound reasoning with which this treatise abounds? so very profound, that I believe it exceeds the powers of humanity to fathom its depths, so far as to draw out of it any true, consistent interpretation of the Apostle’s reasoning on this chapter at all.
I might here add, my dear friend, some other specimens of our Author’s manner of explaining scripture, by his fine human reason: for instance, ‘Keeping ourselves unspotted from the world, he says, page 157, signifies only our using the means of grace.’ And again, when the Apostle informs us, Ephesians v. 9. “that the fruit of the Spirit is in all goodness, righteousness, and truth,” he tells us, that “truth refers to christian doctrine, goodness to christian practice, and by righteousness is meant, the conduct of the whole to particulars, and consists in that equal gentleness of government, where church-authority is made to coincide with the private rights of conscience; and this refers to christian discipline[¹];” with several such like instances, which even the most unwary reader, without much study or application, may meet with, scattered up and down this Author’s performance; but this would be too great a digression. Indeed I should not have dwelt so long even upon this extraordinary interpretation of the thirteenth chapter of the first epistle to the Corinthians, had not the writer himself called it, this decisive passage, and given it as his opinion, page 76, “That this is the only express declaration recorded in scripture, to prove, that all supernatural knowledge or divine influence was to cease, when christianity was perfectly established, or the world arrived at a perfect christian state.” But every day’s experience, nay this Author’s very book, proving beyond a doubt, that christianity is not as yet thus perfectly established; we may yet, according to his own principles, expect divine manifestations of grace and knowledge, and spiritual aids under spiritual distresses, without justly incurring the imputation either of superstition or fanaticism.
[¹] How much more pertinent is Mr. Clark’s interpretation? According to him, “Goodness is an inclination to do good to others, truth is freedom from hypocrisy and dissimulation, righteousness is just dealing.” Ephesians v. 9.
But to proceed. However profound and unintelligible our Author’s comments may be, yet, when he comes to shew the reasonableness and fitness of an abatement or total withdrawing of divine influence in these last days, (but woe to the christian world if he succeeds in his unhallowed attempt!) he speaks intelligibly enough. “On the Spirit’s first descent upon the Apostles, he found their minds rude and uninformed, strangers to all celestial knowledge, prejudiced in favour of a carnal law, and utterly averse to the dictates of the everlasting gospel. The minds of these he illuminated, and, by degrees, led into all truths necessary for the professors of the faith to know, or for the propagators of it to teach.”—True.—“Secondly, the nature and genius of the gospel were so averse to all the religious institutions of the world, that the whole strength of human prejudices was set in opposition to it. To overcome the obstinacy and violence of those prejudices, nothing less than the power of the Holy One was sufficient.”—Good.—“And, thirdly and lastly, There was a time when the powers of this world were combined together for its destruction. At such a period, nothing but superior aid from above, could support humanity in sustaining so great a conflict as that which the holy martyrs encountered with joy and rapture, the horrors of death and torment.”—Excellent.—But what follows?—According to our Author,
Tempora mutantur, nos et mutamur in illis.
“But now,” (a dreadful but it is!) “the profession of christianity is attended with ease and honour;” and we are now, it seems, so far from being “rude and uninformed, and utterly averse to the dictates of the everlasting gospel, that whatever there may be of prejudice, it draws another way. Consequently, a rule of faith being now established, the conviction which the weight of human testimony, and the conclusions of human reason afford us of its truth, are abundantly sufficient to support us in our religious perseverance; and therefore it must certainly be a great mark of fanaticism, to expect such divine communications, as though no such rule of faith was established; and also as highly presumptuous or fanatical to imagine, that rule to be so obscure, as to need the further assistance of the Holy Spirit to explain his own meaning.” Pages 85, 86, 87, 88. This, you will say, my dear friend, is going pretty far; and indeed, supposing matters to be as this writer represents them, I do not see what great need we have of any established rule at all, at least in respect to practice, since corrupt nature is abundantly sufficient of itself, to help us to persevere in a religion attended with ease and honour. And I verily believe, that the Deists throw aside this rule of faith entirely, not barely on account of a deficiency in argument to support its authenticity, but because, they daily see so many who profess to hold this established, self-denying rule of faith with their lips, persevering all their lives long in nothing else but an endless and insatiable pursuit after worldly ease and honour. But what a total ignorance of human nature, and of the true unalterable genius of the everlasting gospel, doth our Author’s arguing discover? For supposing, my dear friend, that this or any other writer should undertake to prove, that the ancient Greeks and Romans were born with sickly, disordered, and crazy bodies, but that we, in modern days, being made of a firmer mould, and being blessed with the established rules of Galen and Hippocrates, need now no further assistance from any present physician, either to explain or apply those rules to our present ails and corporeal distresses; though we could not, without the help of some linguist superior to ourselves, so much as understand the language in which those authors wrote. Supposing, I say, any one was to take it into his head to write in this manner, would he not be justly deemed a dreaming enthusiast or real fanatic? And yet this would be just as rational as to insinuate, with our Author, that we who are born in these last days, have less depravity in our natures, less enmity to, and less prejudice against the Lord Jesus Christ, and less need of the divine teachings of the Blessed Spirit to help us to understand the true spiritual meaning of the holy scriptures, than those who were born in the first ages of the gospel. For as it was formerly, so it is now, the natural man discerneth not the things of the Spirit: and why? “Because they can only be spiritually discerned.” But when is it that we must believe this Author? For, page 73. he talks of “some of the first christians, who were in the happy circumstance of being found innocent, when they were led into the practice of all virtue by the Holy Spirit.” And what occasion for that, if found innocent? But how innocent did the Holy Spirit find them? Doubtless, just as innocent as it finds us, “Conceived and born in sin.” Having in our flesh, our depraved nature, no good thing; bringing into the world with us a corruption, which renders us liable to God’s wrath and eternal damnation; with a carnal mind, which is enmity against God, and a heart, the thoughts and imaginations of which, are declared to be only evil, and that continually; and whose native and habitual language, though born and educated under a christian dispensation, is identically the same as that of the Jews, “We will not have the Lord Jesus to reign over us.” This, and this alone, my dear friend, is all the innocence that every man, naturally the offspring of Adam, whether born in the antideluvian, patriarchal, mosaic, apostolic, or present age, can boast of. And if this be matter of fact, (and who that knows himself can deny it?) it is so far from being superstitious or fanatical to assert the absolute necessity of a divine influence, or a power superior to that of humanity; that it is a most irrefragable argument for its continuance without the least abatement, or withdrawing whatsoever. Daily experience proves, that without such a power, our understandings cannot be enlightened, our wills subdued, our prejudices and enmity overcome, our affections turned into a proper channel, or, in short, any one individual of the apostate fallen race of Adam be saved. And if so, what becomes of our Author’s arguments, to shew the fitness of an abatement or total withdrawing of divine influence in these gospel days? Might he not with as great consistency, have undertaken to shew, the fitness of an abatement or total withdrawing of the irradiating light and genial warmth of the natural sun? For, as the earth on which we tread, stands as much in need now of the abiding influence of the genial rays of that great luminary, in order to produce, keep up, and complete the vegetative life in grass, fruits, plants, and flowers, as it did in any preceding age of the world; so our earthly hearts do now, and always will stand in as much need of the quickening, enlivening, transforming influences of the Spirit of Jesus Christ, that glorious sun of righteousness, as the hearts of the first apostles: if not to make us preachers, yet to make us christians, by beginning, carrying on, and compleating that holiness in the heart and life of every believer in every age, without which no man living shall see the Lord. And the scriptures are so far from encouraging us to plead for a diminution of divine influence in these last days of the gospel, because an external rule of faith is thereby established, that on the contrary, we are encouraged by this very established rule to expect, hope, long, and pray for larger and more extensive showers of divine influence than any former age hath ever yet experienced. For, are we not therein taught to pray, “That we may be filled with all the fulness of God,” and to wait for a glorious epocha, “When the earth shall be filled with the knowledge of the Lord, as the waters cover the seas?” Do not all the saints on earth, and all the spirits of just men made perfect in heaven; nay, all the angels and archangels about the throne of the Most High God, night and day, join in this united cry, Lord Jesus, thus let thy kingdom come!
But, by this time, my dear friend, I imagine you would be glad to know against whom these bruta fulmina, this unscriptural artillery is levelled. Our Author shall inform you: “All modern pretenders to divine influence in general;” and you may be assured “the poor Methodists (those scourges and eye-sores of formal, self-righteous, letter-learned professors) in particular.” To expose, and set these off in a ridiculous light, (a method that Julian, after all his various tortures, found most effectual) this writer runs from Dan to Beersheba; gives us quotation upon quotation out of the Rev. Mr. John Wesley’s Journals; and to use his own simile upon another occasion, by a kind of Egyptian husbandry, draws together whole droves of obscene animals, of his own formation, who rush in furiously, and then trample the Journals, and this sect, already every-where spoken against, under their feet. In reading this part of his work, I could not help thinking of the Papists dressing John Huss in a cap of painted devils, before they delivered him up to the secular arm. For our Author calls the Rev. Mr. John Wesley, “Paltry mimick, spiritual empiric, spiritual martialist, meek apostle, new adventurer.” The Methodists, according to him, are “modern apostles, the saints, new missionaries, illuminated doctors, this sect of fanatics. Methodism itself is modern saintship. Mr. Law begat it, and Count Zinzendorff rocked the cradle; and the devil himself is man-midwife to their new birth.” And yet this is the man, my dear friend, who in his preface to this very book, lays it down, as an invariable maxim, “That truth is never so grossly injured, or its advocates so dishonoured, as when they employ the foolish arts of sophistry, buffoonery, and personal abuse in its defence.” By thy own pen thou shalt be tried, thou hapless, mistaken advocate of the christian cause. Nay, not content with dressing up this meek apostle, this spiritual empiric, these new missionaries, in bear-skins, in order to throw them out to be bated by an ill-natured world, he proceeds to rake up the very ashes of the dead; and, like the Witch of Endor, as far as in him lies, attempts to bring up and disquiet the ghosts of one of the most venerable sets of men that ever lived upon the earth; I mean the good old Puritans: “For these, (says our Author) who now go under the name of Methodists, in the days of our fore-fathers, under the firm reign of Queen Elizabeth, were called Precisians; but then, as a precious metal which had undergone its trial in the fire, and left all its dross, the sect, with great propriety, changed its name,” (a very likely thing, to give themselves a [♦]nick-name, indeed) from Precisian to Puritan. Then, in the weak and distracted times of Charles the First, it ventured to throw off the mask, and under the new name of Independant, became the chief agent of all the dreadful disorders which terminated that unhappy reign.” So that according to this Author’s heraldic, genealogical fiction, “Methodism is the younger daughter to Independancy, and now a Methodist is an apostolic Independant;” (God grant he may always deserve such a glorious appellation) “But an Independant was then a Mahometan Methodist.” Pages 142, 143, 144. What! an Independant a Mahometan Methodist? What! the learned Dr. Owen, the great Dr. Goodwin, the amiable Mr. Howe, and those glorious worthies who first planted the New-England churches, Mahometan Methodists! Would to God, that not only this writer, but all who now profess to preach Christ in this land, were not only almost, but altogether such Mahometan Methodists, in respect to the doctrine of divine influence, as they were! For I will venture to affirm, that if it had not been for such Mahometan Methodists, and their successors, the free-grace dissenters, we should some years ago, have been in danger of sinking into Mahometan Methodism indeed; I mean, into a christianity destitute of any divine influence manifesting itself in grace and knowledge, and void of any spiritual aid in spiritual distresses. But from such a christianity, good Lord deliver this happy land! The design our author had in view in drawing such a parallel, is easily seen through. Doubtless, to expose the present Methodists to the jealousy of the civil government. For, says he, page 142, “We see methodism at present under a well established government, where it is obliged to wear a less audacious look. To know its true character, we should see it in all its fortunes.” And doth this writer then, in order to gratify a sinful curiosity of seeing methodism in all its fortunes, desire to have the pleasure of seeing the weak and distracted times of Charles the first brought back again! Or dares he insinuate, that because, as he immediately adds, our country hath been productive of every strange thing, “that we are in the least danger now of any such distracting turn, since we have a King upon the throne, who in his first most gracious speech to both houses of parliament, declared, he would preserve the act of toleration inviolable? And that being the case, blessed be God, we are in no danger of any return of such weak and distracted times, either from the apostolic independants, Mahometan Methodists, or any religious sect or party whatsoever.” My dear friend, “if this is not gibetting up names with unregenerate malice, to everlasting infamy,” I know not what is. But it happens in this, as in similar cases, whilst men are thus busy in gibbeting up the names of others, they unwittingly, like Haman, when preparing a gallows for that apostolic Independent, that Mahometan Methodist, Mordecai, all the while are only erecting a gibbet for their own.
[♦] “nick-game” replaced with “nick-name”
But, methinks, I see you now begin to be impatient to know, (and indeed I have neither inclination nor leisure at present to pursue our author any further) who this can be that takes such gigantic strides? I assure you, he is a perfect Goliah in the retinue of human learning.——Will you guess?—Perhaps Dr. T——r of Norwich;—no—he is dead. Certainly not a churchman? Yes; a member, a minister, a dignitary, a bishop of the church of England;—and, to keep you no longer in suspence, it is no less a man than Dr. Warburton, the author of “The Divine Legation of Moses,” and now William Lord Bishop of Gloucester. I know you are ready to say, “Tell it not in Gath, publish it not in the streets of Ascalon.” But, my dear friend, what can be done? His Lordship hath published it himself: nay, his book hath just gone through a second impression; and that you may see and judge for yourself, whether I have wronged his Lordship or not, (as it is not very weighty) I have sent you the book itself. Upon the perusal, I am persuaded you will at least be thus far of my opinion, that however decus et tutamen is always the motto engraven upon a bishop’s mitre, it is not always most certain, though his Lordship says it is, page 202, that they are written in every prelate’s breast? And how can this prelate in particular, be said to be the ornament and safeguard of the Church of England? when his principles are as directly contrary to the offices of that church, over which he is by divine permission made overseer, as light is contrary to darkness. You know, my dear friend, what our ministers are taught to say when they baptize: “I beseech you to call upon God the Father, through our Lord Jesus Christ, that of his bounteous goodness he will grant to this child that thing which by nature he cannot have.” But what says his Lordship? “All influence exceeding the power of humility, is miraculous, and therefore to abate or be totally withdrawn, now the church is perfectly established.” What say they when they catechise? “My good child, know this, that thou art not able to do these things of thyself, nor to walk in the commands of God, and to serve him without his special grace.” But what says his Lordship? “A rule of faith being now established, the conviction which the weight of human testimony, and the conclusions of human reason afford, are abundantly sufficient to support us in our religious perseverance.” What says his Lordship himself, when he confirms children thus catechised? “Strengthen them, we beseech thee, O Lord, with the Holy Ghost, the Comforter, and daily increase in them thy manifold gifts of grace, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and ghostly strength.” But what says his Lordship, when he speaks his own sentiments? “All aids in spiritual distresses, as well as those which administered help in corporeal diseases, are now abated or totally withdrawn.” What says his Lordship when he ordains? “Dost thou trust that thou art inwardly moved by the Holy Ghost? then, receive thou the Holy Ghost.”
Come, Holy Ghost, our souls inspire,