« PreviousContinue »
longing more properly to a subsequent period which shall embrace the hil- , ' tory of that pacification; the state and sentiments of the two countries, and of other pations during the peace; the rise and progress of the rupture, with the events which may ensue until hostilities be brought to a permanent ja Vu conclufion.".
As it was one thing to rejoice at the termination of war, and another, N ther to approve of the treaty of Amiens, from the point at which the lable history ceases, we have no certain data for determining whether our ballon author approves or does not approve of that convention. We think, however, that the probability is that he does not; the very reasoning was for which he applies to Lord Bute's peace, applies much more strongly to ident the peace in question. Our author is uniformly the admirer of British energy, and the tone which energy dictates, and as in that and other parts of his work he is distinguished for consistency, we cannot see it poffible for him to reckon the late peace honourable to Britain. He with himen who so eloquently describes the magnanimous and sublime Secretary one Pitt, proposing the most decisive measures to the inonarchs of France and Spain, certainly would feel indignant at the idea of his adored Britons crouching to Buonaparté. These are considerations which we suggest to Dr. Bisset when proceeding with his work, he shall diso
it to the cuss the treaty of Amiens, and ministerial acquiescence with confular infolence, during the hollow trucé with the Corsican barbarian. It is evident.our author does not rest the security of Britain on the peace, but on the manifestation of British ftrength, as will appear from the strong and glowing picture which closes the work.
6. The most important object which Britain ascertained at the termination of the late war, was her own security: for this valuable blessing under Providence, she was indebted to her own extraordinary efforts during the whole of the contest, but especially since the rupture of the first negotiation .. at Paris. She had proved, even beyond her own exertions in former times, that she was superior to the whole naval world combined against her in war, Every attempt to disturb her rights, to invade her dominions, either directly ke this or indirealy to impair the sources of her commercial prosperity and political greatness, have recoiled on the authors: never had her commerce been so flourishing, or her power so refiftless, as during the most arduous war 'which her history has to record. Threatened, and actual rebellion, only demonsirated paramount loyalty and patriotism: attempts, on her finances displayed, beyond former conception, the extent of her resources ; leaving their bounds far beyond calculation; resources exhauftless, because flowing from minds which afford perennial supply; menaced invasion served only to show the number and force of her voluntary defenders. Every means that fertile genius could devise, or gigantic power execute, was essayed against our country: if the could have been subdued by any human effort, in the late arduous contest she must have fallen : the stupendous exertions that were employed against Britain, but employed in vain, demonstrate her invincible. HERE RESTS OUR SECURITY, IN THE MANIFESTATION OF RESOURCES NOT TO BB EXHAUSTED, A SPIRIT NOT TO BE BROKEN, AND A FORCE NOT TO BE SUBDUED; OUR SECURITY IS INVULNEXABLE WHILE WE CONTINUE WHAT WE HAVE BEEN, AND ARE TRUR TO OURSELVES."
Remarks on the Doctrine of Futijication by Faith: in a Letter to the
Rev. John Overton, A. B. Author of a Work entitled “ The True
Rempstone, Nottinghamthire. 8vo. Pp. 38. Harchard. 1802. Mi, TF this valuable pamphlet had not accidentally escaped our notice, - we thould long ago have testified our high esteem of it, by laying : an account of it before our readers. It is, indeed, deserving of very
high esteem; for it gives a concise and most masterly view of one of the most important doctrines of the Christian faith: a view at once fo fimple and satisfactory that, did we not know with what pertinacity inveterate prejudices are cherished and defended, we should hope that there would no longer be any dispute on the subject. .
The doctrine of justification by faith has been called the " funda.. mental doctrine of Protestantism.” It might, with more propriety, be called the “ fundamental doctrine of the gospel ;" for, when
rightly underscood, so it certainly is. It is lamentable, however, that, - by many protestants, this doctrine has been totally perverted, and made
fubfervient to the grosseft licentiousness: To give proofs of this affer... - tion would be wholly fuperfluous ; for its truth neither is, nor can be, : 29
called in question. And, indeed, while the notion is ftrenuously ina culcated, that nothing but faith is required from man in order to his : . being accepted of God, in other words, that “faith is the only con
dition of man's juftification;" accompanied, (as this notion uniformly _.is,) by the doctrine of the “final perseverance of the saints," or
that “a man once justified can never totally and finally fall from
very circumstance of its leading to such unchristian conduct is a strong presumption that it is not the Joctrine meant to be inculcated either by fcripture or by the Church of England ; and if it naturally leads to such conduct, as it undoubtedly does, the presumption becomes equivalent to demonstration. ; . This notion of justification by faith is one of the most essential teners of Calvinisin ; a system of divinity which, as Mr. Daubeny has well observed, is " wholly made up of frightful extremes.” The notion is, accordingly, among the most favourite of that party who have lately assumed, among us, the proud appellation of the true churchmen,” and whose purpose it evidently appears to be, to disseminate, as the only sevangelical" doctrines, a species of methodism grafted on Calvinism. Their champion, Mr. Overton, has dedicated a whole chapter of his book to its support. He maintains that “ faith only, pr faith without works, is the the conditional or inftrumental causa of this blefing,” meanirg justification ; and that a good works, are neither its meritorious, cause nor its appointed condition.” He strongly censures those writers who assert that " good works are the condition of salvation; ” and, speaking of the Church of England, he says, “ if her doctrine indeed is," as Bishop Bull, whose opinion he had quoted, alleged, “ that we are thus justified by faith and good works; or that faith and good works are thus the conditions of justification, is it not very strange that in none of her express writings on the subject The should have affirmed this? And is there a single expression that sounds like it, either in her articles or homiliis on the point? Let the advocates of the doctrine produce it." The object of Mr. Pearson's pan phlet is to few that this doctrine is equally that of the church and of the Bible ; and, in our opinion, no object was ever more completely attained.
« I will firit,” says our author, to Mr. Overton, “ premise that I do not object to your denying 'good works to be the meritorious cause of justification, but to your denying that they are the appointed condition of justification,' and ftill more to your denying that they are the appointed condition of salvation.'
“ Jurification is the being accounted righteous before God. All, who acknowledge the holiness of the Divine Nature, and the finfulness of the human race, as they are set soith in the criptures, will readily agree that the only meritorious cause of our being accounted righteous before God, is Jesus Christ. At least, there is no difference of opinion, on this point, between you and the writers whom you undertake to oppose. This cause of justication, therefore, will be allowed to be always the same. But, besides what is done in this matter on the part of God, something is to be done on the part of man. Hence arises another cause of jullification, which may properly enough be called the conditional cause. This will vary according to the circumstances of the person who is supposed to be justified, and the time ai which justification is supposed to take place. The ultimate end or object di fuftification is, salvation. He, therefore, who continues in a state of joltification, till death, will be saved. Generally speaking, however, the inie mediate effect of justification is, not that we are saved, but that we are placed in a state of salvation. But, as being placed in a state of salvation, and
being being saved, are different things, the condition of both may not be exactly the fame. At leait, in considering the question of conditions, regard muit always be had to which of these two is intended. Part of the difference be. tween you and your opponents seems to arise from this, that what they say concerning the condition of continuing in a justified state, or a state of lalvațion, and of being finally saved, you underliand them as laying concerning the condition of being at first justified, or of entering into a liate of salvation. If, indeed, on further consideration you perfiit in maintaining that good works are not a condition of final salvation, I must despair of bringing
you and them to be of one mind in this particular, but I hope to convince e nel you that, in maintaining this, you are iupported by the authority neither of diplcripture nor of the church.” (Pp.7, 8, 9,) godia ) This able divine then proceeds to enquire what are the conditions of licated being first justified, or of entering into a state of salvation. He ob..
ferres chat the Christian dispensation is a covenant, of which the very existence is entirely owing to our Saviour Christ, to whom, by conrea' quence, all the benefits resulting from it to man are to be ascribed. But a covenant, from its nature, implies conditions ; conditions of entering into it, and conditions of continuing in it. Without observing
these we are not to look for its promised rewards. The ordinary e his means appointed for our entering into this covenant is the sacrame.:t verhit of baptism; for they that receive baptism rightly are grafted into
the Church : the promises of forgiveness of fin, and of our adoption to be the fons of God by the Holy Ghost, are visibly signed and Sealed." (Art. xxvii.) Now what are the conditions of being baptized? For the same must be those of being justified, or placed in a
state of salvation. In the catechism they are declared to be “ ReBi pentance, whereby they” the candidates, “ forsake fin; and faith,
whereby they ftedfastly believe the promises of God, made to them in that facrament.”. But repentance must consist of two parts at least; contrition for fins past and a resolution to live well for the future. That this resolution is indispensibly required in order to baptism, is evident
from the baptismal vow itself, in which the candidate engages to re' nounce what God has forbidden, to believe what he has revealed and to
Perform what he has commanded. (See questions in the Off, for bapa . ? tifin.) Whether Mr. Overton will allow repentance, thus understood,
to be a good work, our author fuys thac he does not know; but he hews, from Mufheim, that, in the primitive church, good works, or. "Satisfactory proofs of pious dispositions and upright intentions" were required of the catechumens, for a considerable time previously to baptism. And our own chuch, in the case of adult persons, direct that such candidates be exhorted to prepare themselves with prayers and falling for the receiving of this holy facrament." (Rub.) If, in the cacechism, no actual good works are required, the reason is, that no opportunity of performing them is supposed: the greater number of persons being baptized in infancy. These persons, when they come to the years of discretion, are supposed to take the baptismal, Vow upon themselves; and it would evidently be absurd to require the
performance of good works before they understand the nature of the plain a obligation. (Pp. 10-15.)
" Such," says Mr. Pearson, « are the conditions of being at firs justified, or of being admitted into a state of salvation.” His realoning can be evaded in no other way but by denying that by baptism, we are justified or admitted into a state of salvation. It is, accordingly, fool molt (trenuously denied by Mr. Overton, for the purpose, undoubtedly, they of avoiding the confequence; but how widely in this, as in many other instances, Mr. Overton has departed from the Church of England, we formerly had occasion to shew. To allow, however, that justification was used by our church as synonymous with baptism would have been at once to abandon his cause. He, therefore, chooses rather to call in question the meaning of one of the plainest pallages
office is not to pass the time of this present life unfruitfully and idly, after that we are baptized or justified.”. And, in order that the doubts which he wished to suggest with regard to this passage might take faster hold of the minds of his readers, he, with his usual good faith, represents Dr. Hey as affording these doubts the sanction of his authority. “In respect to the notion," he says, that “justification is synonimous to baptiím,” Dr. Key allows that the word' is feldom, if ever used in this sense, except, in our article and Homily. And does not this circumstance render it highly improbable that it is so used there ? Does it not far more than outweigh the single expresfion • baptized or justified,' in the Homily ?" (Ov. p. 180.) Would not any one, from Mr. Overton's account, suppose that Dr. Hey meant to say that our reformers feldom, if ever, spoke of justification as equi. valent to baptism? But Dr. Hey's meaning is directly the contrary, The very paragraph imr.mediately preceding that to which Mr. Overton refers is expressly employed in proving that this was the common "language used at the time of the reformation." The learned profefTor then adds as follows: "There is the more need of this account of justification, as some of our Christian brethren seem to conceive it as giving them a title to eternal happiness which cannot be forfeited.". And, after adverting to the process by which this conception might, as he imagines, come to be first entertained, he says, “I imagine that all this is a good deal owing to our feldom, if ever, using the word justi. fication as it is used in our article and Homily, as synonymous to baptism.” (Lect. iii. 335, 336.) Dr. Hey, therefore, says that, in his falla opinion, a grofs doctrinal error may have taken its rise from our hau. that ing deserted the language of the reformers. Mr. Overton makes him say, that the reformers seldom, if ever, used such language, and hints that it is they niver used it but in the foregoing single passage of the Homily. And this is Mr. Overton's usual way of guarding against "the iniquity of quotation.”
But to proceed with Mr. Pearson. What are the conditions upon which, according to the doctrine of our church, those who have fallen