Volume 1. Number 9. April 5, 1824, pp. 54-61.

• Essays on Ecclesiastical Characters, Councils, Creeds, and Sects.--No. I. by Alexander Campbell, pp. 54-57.
• Extracts from My Sentimental Journal.--No. I. The Nature and Power of Faith Illustrated by Alexander Campbell, pp. 57-59.
• That Jesus Is the Christ by Alexander Campbell, pp. 59-60.
• The Foundation of Hope and of Christian Union by Alexander Campbell, pp. 60-61.
• From a Baptist in Ohio to the Editor by Steady Seektruth, p. 61.

      HAVING paid a little attention to the clergy of our time, we shall now examine the principles, views and circumstances, that gave rise to such an order of men. The modern clergy are much indebted to those who laid the foundation of their empire. Other men have labored, and they have entered into their labors. Little do many think, and indeed little do they know, that the modern clergy are indebted to Pythagoras, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Zeno, Epicurus, and a thousand Pagan philosophers, Jewish and Christian theorists, for the order of things which they found ready to their hand, soon as they put on the sacerdotal robes. Philosophers originated opinions, opinions obtained disciples, disciples made sects, sects adopted creeds, [54] creeds required councils, councils published canons; and all these created and required priests to illustrate, to approbate and to fulminate their decisions. The consolidation of systems of measures for establishing and perpetuating a flourishing spiritual commonwealth, required a thousand ingredients that escape public notice, because not submitted to public inspection.

      Our plan requires us to notice the ancient philosophers and the sects which they established, as many of their opinions were early imbibed by most of the christian teachers, and were soon an element of their creeds. We shall begin with Pythagoras.

      This philosopher flourished about five hundred and fifty years before Christ. He travelled extensively, and spent twenty-five years in Egypt in quest of knowledge. He opened a school at Croton in Italy, which was much frequented by Grecian and Italian youths. He was the first man that called himself a philosopher, and gave currency to the name. He inculcated on his pupils the austerities of the Egyptian priests. He obliged them all to put their property into a common stock, and thus to have all things in common. He used the three sorts of style adopted by the Egyptians in teaching their mysteries: the simple, the hieroglyphical, and the symbolical. He preferred the last. He first called the world kosmos, from its order and beauty; and became famous for his skill in geometry, astronomy and arithmetic. But his theological principles are those which we have in view.He taught that,

      "All mankind lived in some pre-existent state, and that for the sins committed by them in that state, some of their souls were sent into human bodies, and others into brutes, to be punished for, and to be purged from, their former sins. Viewing the whole brutal creation to be animated by human souls, he held it unlawful to kill any animal, and to eat animal food. In order to purge themselves from sins committed in a pre-existent state, he taught his disciples to practise long fastings, and other severities, to subdue their bodily appetites, and to subordinate all desires to the soul. These were the grand peculiarities of his system."

      Socrates flourished four hundred years before Christ. He is said to have taught (for he left nothing in writing behind him) that,

      "The soul of man is immortal, because immaterial; that there is but one supreme God; that there are demons that superintend the affairs of this world; that men ought not to pursue riches or worldly honors, but to cultivate their minds and to practise virtue. It is believed that he borrowed some of his ideas from the Jewish scriptures."

      Plato, the scholar of Socrates, flourished three hundred and forty-eight years before Christ. It is chiefly from his writings that we learn the sentiments of Socrates. He improved upon the principles of Socrates, and his fame transcended that of all other philosophers, in the department of religion and morality. He taught that,

      "The universe was governed by a being of glorious power and wisdom, possessed of perfect liberty, and independence. That there were a certain invincible malignity and corruption in matter, insuperable by the power of God. That the human soul is an emanation from God, so, necessarily immortal; that evil must necessarily exist from the union of matter and mind in the human person; that demons were an order of beings inferior to the Deity, but superior to man, and that they governed the world; consequently, that they should be worshipped because of their agency in human affairs. Some of them he viewed as mediators, "carrying men's prayers to God and his answers to men." In his Timæus he declares, that "it is neither easy to find the parent of the universe, nor safe to discover him to the vulgar when found." He therefore taught that, in matters of worship, his disciples ought to govern themselves by the laws of their country (nomo poleos.) This was the maxim of Socrates, and to it Plato agreed. In his book viii. De Rep. he orders "worship and rites to be performed to the gods, and to demons, and to Esculapius, lest he should too much shock the prejudices of the vulgar."

      Aristotle, the disciple of Plato, flourished three hundred and thirty-two years before Christ. He taught that,

      "Matter was eternal; that the world, by powers natural to matter, has continued from all eternity the same as we see it, and that there exists nothing in the universe distinct from matter; that the present course of things, consisting of the motions of the heavens, and of the successive generations and corruptions of animals and vegetables can neither be interrupted nor destroyed by any thing extraneous, but must continue forever. As for the Deity, if there were any, he taught that it is a nature happy in the contemplation of itself, and entirely regardless of human affairs."

      Epicurus, founder of the Epicurean system of philosophy in Greece, flourished two hundred and seventy years before Christ. The Epicureans maintained that,

      "The world arose from chance; that the gods whose existence they did not dare to deny, neither did nor could extend their providential care to human affairs; that the soul was mortal; that pleasure was to be regarded as the ultimate end of man, and that virtue was neither worthy of esteem nor choice but with a view to the attainment of pleasure."¹

      Zeno, the first teacher of the Stoic system, flourished in Greece two hundred and sixty four years before Christ.

      "The god of the Stoics is described as a corporeal being, united to matter by a necessary connexion, and subject to the determination of an immutable fate. This fate is, however, explained by the Stoics to be the wise counsels of their sovereign, to which he is obliged to conform, and from which he can never depart. When the Stoics say Jupiter is subject to fate, they mean he is subject to the wisdom of his own counsels, and must act in conformity with his supreme perfections. They said that the existence of the soul was confined to a certain period of time. They looked with indignant contempt upon effeminate vices. Simplicity and moderation were carried to the extreme of austerity, and external good and evil were viewed with haughty contempt."

      The Cynic philosophy, taught first by Antisthenes, was so similar in its moral discipline to that of the Stoics, that we shall subjoin the sum of moral doctrine of Antisthenes and the Cynic sect:

      "Virtue alone is a sufficient foundation for a [55] happy life. Virtue consists, not in a vain ostentation of learning, or an idle display of words, but in a steady course of right conduct. Wisdom and virtue are the same. A wise man will always be contented with his condition, and will live rather according to the precepts of virtue, than according to the laws or customs of his country. Wisdom is a secure and impregnable fortress--virtue, armor which cannot be taken away. Whatever is honorable is good whatever is disgraceful is evil. Virtue is the only bond of friendship. It is better to associate with a few good men against a vicious multitude, than to join the vicious, however numerous, against the good. The love of pleasure is a temporary madness." The following maxims and apothegms are also ascribed to Antisthenes: "As rust consumes iron, so does envy consume the heart of man. That state is hastening to ruin, in which no difference is made between good and bad men. The harmony of brethren is a stronger defence than a wall of brass. A wise man converses with the wicked, as a physician with the sick, not to catch the disease, but to cure it. A philosopher gains at least one thing from his manner of life--a power of conversing with himself. The most necessary part of learning is, to unlearn our errors. The man who is afraid of another, whatever he may think of himself, is a slave. Antisthenes, being told that a bad man had been praising him, said, What foolish thing have I been doing?"

      The Academics, who, with the Epicureans, were the most numerous of the Grecian sects at the christian era despaired of finding truth in such a variety of opinions, and therefore taught that,

      "It was uncertain whether the gods existed or not; whether the soul was mortal or immortal; whether virtue was preferable to vice, or vice to virtue."

      The Eclectics supposed that many things were unreasonable and absurd in all the systems of philosophy, and therefore set about forming a new system, comprising, what they supposed, the most reasonable tenets and doctrines of all the sects. This eclectic philosophy was taught with great success in Alexandria in Egypt, when the Messiah was born. And Philo the Jew, who was a member of this sect, represents it as very flourishing at that time. The Eclectics held Plato in the highest esteem, yet they made no scruple to join with his doctrines whatever they thought conformable to reason in the tenets and opinions of other philosophers.

      Hitherto we have mentioned only the systems of philosophy that obtained first among the Greeks, and afterwards among the Romans. We shall just, in the same brief manner, notice the oriental philosophy, denominated by orientalists, not philosophy, but science. The votaries of the oriental science were numerous in Persia, Syria, Chaldea, and Egypt. Of this science there were many sects. It is worthy of remark, that, while "the Grecian and Roman sects of philosophy were much divided about the first principles of science, all the sects of the oriental science deduced their tenets from one fundamental principle." This science supposed that,

      "The origin of evils, with which the universe abounds, was to be found not in God, whom they viewed as essentially good and benevolent; but as there was nothing beyond or without the Deity but matter, therefore matter is the centre and source of all evil, of all vice. That matter was eternal and derived its present form, not from the will of the supreme God, but from the creating power of some inferior intelligence, to whom the world and its inhabitants owed their existence. Some imagined two eternal principles from whence all things proceeded, the one presiding over light and the other over matter; and by their perpetual conflict, explained the mixture of good and evil that appears in the universe. Others maintained that the being that presided over matter was not an eternal principle, but a subordinate intelligence, one of those whom the supreme God produced from himself. They supposed that this being was moved by a sudden impulse to reduce to order the rude mass of matter, and to create the human race. A third sort fell upon another system, and said that there was a triple divine principle, or a triumvirate of beings, in which the Supreme Deity was distinguished from the material, and from the creator of this world. The Supreme Being they supposed to be as a radiant light, most pure, diffused through the immensity of space, called the pleroma. The eternal nature, having dwelt long in solitude, produced from itself two minds of a different sex, which resembled the Supreme Parent in the most perfect manner. In process of time, from these two proceeded a celestial family. These were called Æons. How many of these there were was not decided. The Creator of this world they called Demiurge.

      "Man, they considered a compound of terrestrial and celestial nature--of the evil principle of matter, and of the divinity. Those who subdue the evil principle that propels them to sin against the Supreme ascend directly to the Pleroma. Those yielding to the evil principle shall be sent after death into other bodies until they awake from their sinful lethargy. In the end the Supreme God shall come forth victorious, and, having delivered from their servitude the greatest part of those enslaved souls, shall dissolve the frame of this visible world and involve it in ruin. After this, primitive tranquility will be restored in the universe, and God shall reign with happy spirits in undisturbed felicity through endless ages."

      Such were the prominent features of the oriental philosophy. Among the Jews, prior to the birth of the Messiah, there was also a variety of opinions and sects. They imbibed many of the opinions popular among the sects of philosophers, and even some of the superstitious notions of the Egyptians, Syrians and Arabians who lived in their neighborhood. In Palestine, the Jewish and Samaritan religions flourished at the Christian era. The Samaritans originated in the time of king Rehoboam. Shalmanesser, king of Assyria, having besieged Samaria, the capital of the kingdom of Israel, contradistinguished from the capital of the kingdom of Judah, carried the people captive and filled their place with Babylonians, Cutheans, and other idolators. These having obtained an Israelitish priest, to instruct them in the ancient religion of the land, embraced the Jews' religion, with which they mixed a great part of their own idolatry. After the return of the Jews from their captivity, they entirely quitted the worship of idols. They, though united in religion with the Jews, quarrelled with them about the rebuilding of he temple; and when they could not prevail, they erected a temple on Mount Gerizim, in opposition to that at Jerusalem. The Jews and Samaritans, like many sects in our time, who approximate very nigh to each other, but go not the whole length, cherished a cordial antipathy [56] against each other; so much so, as to have no dealings with one another. The Jews were divided into three principal sects, besides many subordinate ones, at the christian epoch--the Essenes, the Pharisees, and the Sadducees. The Essenes dwelt generally in solitude, and maintained that,

      "Religion consisted, wholly in contemplation and silence. They practised a most religious abstinence. Many of them lived in celibacy, and observed a variety of penitential exercises and mortifications, borrowed from Egypt where many of them dwelt. The Essenes of Syria thought it possible to appease God by sacrifices, though in a manner quite different from the Jewish. Others maintained that a serene and composed mind, addicted to the contemplation of divine things, was the only sacrifice acceptable to God. They viewed the law of Moses as an allegorical system of spiritual and mysterious truths, and renounce all regard to its letter in the explication of it. They held absolute predestination, and that only the soul would be punished to a future state."

      The Sadducees maintained that,

      "Only the written law was of divine authority; that neither the oral law nor the prophets were to be regarded as of divine authority; that the written law was to be interpreted literally; that there was no resurrection, nor future state, angel, nor human spirit; that there was no predestination; that man was an absolute master of all his actions."

      The Pharisees taught that,

      "The law of Moses, the prophets, and the oral law, or the traditions of the elders, were of equal authority; that there was a resurrection of the dead, a future state, angels and spirits; that the children of Abraham alone should be raised from the dead and enter into future happiness; that there should be eating and drinking in a future state; and that every man would be reunited to his former wife. They held absolute predestination, and at the same time, with the Sadducees, they held free will. They separated from all they deemed sinners, and would not so much as eat or drink with them. They held that the words of the Old Testament had a double sense--the one literal, the other mysterious. They were strict observers of all the traditions of the elders, and cultivated a very sanctified appearance in the presence of the people?"

      Such were the leading moral and religious philosophical sects that were flourishing when the Messiah was born. Besides these there was an endless variety of subdivisions. Nearly three hundred different opinions were entertained amongst the Romans concerning the summum bonum, or chief good. Thus the Messiah found the world with respect to opinion; and as respected the worship of idols in all its variety, volumes could do no more than give their names. Their gods, their temples, their priests, their sacrifices, and their festivals, would require an age to unfold.

      The use we intend to make of the preceding documents in the course of this work, demanded this brief notice of them. We hope our readers will ultimately agree with us to the necessity of giving this abstract.--

EDITOR.      

      IN approaching the city we met multitudes of men and women flying in every direction, some of them having literally forsaken all that they had; husbands had left their wives, parents their children, and children their parents. I asked every one who would stop to hear me, what was the matter. I always heard in reply "The barbarian foes, the ruthless band, the merciless Scythians are approaching our city." "Have they yet entered it? replied I. "No," said they. Are they yet in sight? I rejoined. I was again answered to the negative. Why then do you hasten? was the last question their trepidation would afford me time to ask. The answer which I received was pronounced with uncommon vehemence. Every feature in their face, and every tone corresponded with the import of their reply. It was this: "Twelve heralds of undoubted veracity gave the intelligence that they were just at hand, arrayed in all the vengeance of savage ferocity, stimulated to furious excess, from the ills they had received from our nation." I joined the fugitives, and, after retiring to a cave, fell into the following reflections:--

      What an advantage to mankind that they have received from their Creator the capacity or faculty of being so certain of what they have not seen, of that for which they have not the evidence of sense, as to be moved, excited, and impelled to every kind of exertion, suited to the nature of the case, from what they have believed, as though they had seen it. The uncultivated citizen, as well as the sage philosopher, is equally certain, and equally moved by the belief of testimony. It is a blessing, thought I, an inexpressible favor, that we have this capacity of being assured of what we have not seen, of what we have not felt, upon the testimony of others; and that this is as common to all mankind as instinct is to brutes, and so perfect at first that it is not capable of improvement; for a child believes as firmly, what it can apprehend, as a hoary-headed sage. This people, thought I, have been saved by faith--saved from the jaws of destruction, by believing what the twelve heralds reported. I could not but reflect with surprise at the stupidity of those rabbinical doctors who have made so many nonsensical distinctions about the way and manner of believing, and the different kinds of faith. I found those people saved their lives by faith, without ever stopping to inquire of what kind their faith was; the only inquiry was about the evidence--about the number, character, ability, and faithfulness of the witnesses. Being satisfied upon these points, they never thought of consulting their own feelings upon the occasion. But the fact which they believed operated upon all that was within them, just according to its own nature. It produced all its natural results; for every fact believed has its natural or necessary results, and from the nature of all things it must necessarily be so. It was not their belief or their faith, abstract from the fact, that saved them; but the fact believed, that produced such a change upon them and upon their conduct. In one word, these people were saved by the belief of one fact, and that fact was of so great importance as to change their views and practice.

      Leaving the cave, and making my retreat into the interior of the country, I met, after a few days, an old acquaintance, Timothy Stedfast, who used to be rather of a melancholy temperament, when employed as a menial servant in the service of Lord A. His countenance, attire, and gait, astonished me Instead of that downcast aspect, and evil-boding, melancholic appearance, a peculiar cheerfulness overspread his countenance, [57] and an eye beaming with joy, indicated that some marvellous change had taken place in the views and circumstances of Timothy.--His raiment, too, was not of that rough and homespun texture as that in which he formerly performed his services in the fields and gardens of his former master. He was sumptuously appareled, and even his style of address and demeanor participated in the general elevation and improvement in his aspect. What! said I, so far from home, friend Timothy! "Yes," said he, "and I must be farther yet; I am just going to the sea coast to embark for Jamaica."--What! to Jamaica? "O yes, and I would go much farther on the same errand." Pray can you inform me of the nature of your errand? "Yes, with pleasure, and no doubt it will give you joy to know it." Say on. "You know I had an old uncle, of whom I once told you, living in Jamaica, who was very rich; his children being all dead, he has left me his vast estate, and now I am going to possess it. It is said to be worth half a million, and the old gentleman having lately departed this life, has bequeathed the whole of it to your humble servant." Indeed! said I. But how do you know that such is the fact? He replied, that three persons whom he once knew, men of undoubted veracity, had written to him informing him of the fact; "besides," said he, "a copy of his last will and testament has been forwarded to me, to which the seal of the chief magistrate is appended.--I am certain, I am certain," exclaimed he. "It is a fact." O then, said I, I wish you all possible happiness; but be mindful that you were once poor. We parted.

      I began to muse again on the excellency and power of faith. Truly I thought it was the "confidence of things hoped for, and the conviction of things not seen." And what first struck me with irresistible force, was, that the fact believed always operates according to its own nature. What a change in the views, feelings, appearance, and pursuits of Timothy!--Once a rough, unpolished, downcast, desponding servant; now he possesses a smooth and polished exterior, a cheerful countenance, and a joyful heart; rich in faith, though not yet in actual possession of the inheritance. How powerful the principle! What an impulse to activity, industry, and perseverance! He forsakes the land of his nativity, his father's house, his kindred, and the companions of his youth; he encounters the toils of a long journey, perils by land and dangers by sea, from the influence of faith.--This is the cause, the sole cause, of this extraordinary change. He cultivates the manners, the style, the demeanor, suitable to his anticipated circumstances; and though yet not in possession of the inheritance, rejoices in hope of realizing all his expectations. And what still astonishes me, the belief of one fact thus converts the man--not the way and manner of believing, but the fact believed is the whole mystery.

      I was roused from my meditations upon this striking instance of the nature and power of faith, by meeting a friend whom I had met a few days ago, in all the cheerfulness and joy of good health, of good circumstances, of the finest animal spirits, light, gay, buoyant; but now clothed in mourning, and of a sad and dejected appearance. A heavy sigh and a cheek washed with tears indicated the bitterness of her grief. With querulous accents she told me that two friends, of great respectability of character, had written to her that her aged father, her younger brothers, and sisters, had perished by the victorious barbarians in the late invasion; that her father did not hear the tidings in time to effect an escape. I told her not to faint in the day of adversity; besides, said I, it may not be so bad as you expect; perhaps your informants were not assured of the fact. "Oh!" exclaimed she, "I could wish I could not believe their testimony; but I know their character and their competency to give certain information; and I am certain, yes, undoubtingly certain, that such is the fact." I dismounted and retired to an inn, where I spent the evening in meditating upon the simplicity, the power, and excellency of faith. The following conclusions were the necessary results of the scenes through which I had recently passed:--

      1. In the first place the singular power of faith is manifested in all places and amongst all people. It demonstrates itself to be one of the common, the most common, and intelligible principles of action; and produces the greatest changes in human character, in the views and pursuits of mankind. It overcomes the greatest difficulties, and impels men to the highest achievements known in the world.

      2. It always operates according to the fact believed. Joy and sorrow, love and hatred, fear and hope, are the effects of the fact believed, and not of the manner of believing, so much talked of.

      3. Evidence alone produces faith, or testimony is all that is necessary to faith. This is demonstrably evident in every case; and therefore the certainty felt is always proportioned to the character of the testimony produced. Faith is capable of being greatly increased in many instances; but only to one way, and that is, either by affording additional evidence, or by brightening the evidences already produced.--To exhort men to believe, or to try to scare them into faith by loud vociferations, or to cry them into faith by effusions of natural or mechanical tears, without submitting evidence, is as absurd as to try to build a house or plant a tree in a cloud.

      4. Faith, abstract from facts, produces no substantial, no real effect. Faith and opinions have nothing to do with each other--there is no consanguinity between them. A man might as reasonably expect to support animal life by the simple act of chewing, as to be saved by the mere act of believing. It is not a man's eating that keeps him alive, but what he does eat; so it is not a man's believing that saves his soul, but what he does believe.

      5. All controversies about the nature of faith, about the different kinds of modern faith, are either learned or unlearned nonsense, calculated to deceive and bewilder the superstitious multitudes that hang upon the lips of spiritual guides. The only, the grand question with every man is, What is fact, or truth? This ascertained, let there be no inquiries about how a man believes, or whether his faith be of the right kind. If a man really believes any fact, his faith soon becomes apparent by the influence of the fact upon him.

      6. No person can help believing when the evidence of truth arrests his attention. And without evidence it is as impossible to believe, as to bring something out of nothing.

      7. The term faith is used in the Bible in the commonly received sense of mankind, and the faith which we have in the testimony of God differs from that we have in the testimony of men in this one respect only--that as men may [58] be deceived, and may deceive others, so the confidence we repose in their testimony, in some instances, may be very limited; but as God cannot he deceived himself, neither can deceive others, so the confidence we have in his testimony is superior to that we repose in the testimony of men; and as the word comes to us in demonstration of the Holy Spirit, or attested to us by the supernatural gifts which accompanied the testimony of the original witnesses; so it affords the highest possible evidence, and therefore produces the greatest confidence. If we receive the testimony of men, says John, and act upon it in the most important concerns, the testimony of God is greater, and is capable of producing greater certainty, and infinitely worthy of being acted upon in the all-important concerns of the world to come.

EDITOR.      

      GEORGE KING is the name of a man; but that George is king, is a proposition that expresses what either is, or is not true. And that George is the king is a proposition not only more definite than George is king, but it expresses something more. It expresses that he is either the chief of kings, or that he is the king spoken of or referred to by the speaker. This, we presume, is apprehended by all. Now, Jesus Christ is the name of a person; but that Jesus is Christ, or that Jesus is the Christ, is a proposition that is either true or false. In the four gospels, or during the lifetime of the Messiah, the term Christ was never applied to him as a proper name, but as an appellative. After some time it was used as a proper name, and frequently without the name Jesus attached to it, it designated the Saviour. Thus, when Matthew wrote "the lineage of Jesus Christ," he used the word as a proper name; but it is obvious to all, from the perusal of the four gospels, especially in the original, or in Campbell's improved translation, that the term Christ was never addressed to the Saviour, while on earth, as a proper name, but as an appellative. The use of the article in the Greek is lost in many places in the English by the negligence or misapprehensions of king James' translators. Dr. Campbell observes in his Preliminary Dissertations, vol. i. p. 223: "If we were to judge by the common version, or even by most versions into modern tongues, we should consider the word as rather a proper name than an appellative, or name of office, and should think of it only as a surname given to our Lord. Our translators have contributed greatly to this mistake, by very seldom prefixing the article before Christ, though it is rarely wanting in the original. The word Christ was at first as much an appellative as the word baptist was, and the one was as regularly accompanied with the article as the other. Yet our translators, who always say the baptist, have, one would think, studiously avoided saying the Christ. This may appear, to superficial readers, an inconsiderable difference; but the addition of the article will be found, when attended to, of real consequence for conveying the meaning in English, with the same perspicuity and propriety with which it is conveyed in Greek. So much virtue there is in the article, which, in our idiom, is never prefixed to the name of a man, though it is invariably prefixed to the name of office, unless where some pronoun or appropriating expression renders it unnecessary; that, without it, the sense is always darkened, and sometimes marred. Thus, in such expressions as these, "this Jesus whom I preach unto you is Christ--Paul testified to the Jews that Jesus was Christ--showing by the scriptures that Jesus was Christ"--the unlearned reader forms no distinct apprehension, as the common application of the words leads him uniformly to consider Jesus and Christ, as no other than the name and surname of the same person it would have conveyed to such a reader precisely the same meaning to have said, "Paul testified to the Jews that Christ was Jesus;" and so of the rest. The article alone, therefore, in such cases, adds considerable light to the expression; yet no more than what the words of the historian manifestly convey to every reader who understands his language. It should be, therefore, "Paul testified to the Jews that Jesus was the Christ, or the Messiah," &c. Many other examples might be brought to the same purpose; but these are sufficient."

      That Jesus is the Christ is proposed to us as a truth in the New Testament. But what is implied in the term Christ? John tells us that it is a correct translation of the word Messiah. Now both terms denote one and the same thing; for Messiah in Hebrew, and Christ in Greek, signify anointed. That Jesus is the anointed, is, in our tongue, equivalent to "Jesus is the Christ." But still a question may occur, What is the meaning or peculiar import of the term "anointed" in this connexion? To this we answer from the bible, that persons designed for the office of king, for the office of high priest, and, sometimes, for the office of prophet, were, by a divine command, anointed with oil, and thus empowered and consecrated by God to the office for which they were designated. Thus Saul was called the Lord's anointed, and this consideration prevented David from taking away his life when obnoxious to his wrath and in his power. David also, and the kings of Judah were thus consecrated and empowered to act as kings, as viceroys, under God, over Israel. In allusion to this ceremony of inauguration, Paul applies to our King these words: "your God has anointed you with the oil of gladness above your associates in office," above all the prophets priests, and kings that were ever sent to Israel.

      Three eminent prophets, David, Isaiah, and Daniel, represent the promised Deliverer as an anointed prophet, an anointed priest, and an anointed king. Isaiah represents him as an anointed prophet, chap. lxi. 1. "The Lord has anointed me to preach good tidings to the poor." Daniel represents him as an anointed priest, chap. ix. 25. 26. "And after threescore and two weeks shall the anointed, Messiah the Prince, be cut off, but not for himself," &c. David, in the second psalm, represents him as an anointed king. He represents the alliance of the kings of the earth against the Lord's anointed, and sings his coronation upon Zion the hill of his holiness. The whole of the salvation which sinful men require is comprised in the performance of these three offices. We are ignorant, guilty, and enslaved. To remove ignorance is the office of a prophet; to remove guilt, the office of a priest; and to emancipate and lead to victory, to defend and protect, the office of a king. Now, to believe that "Jesus is the Christ," is to receive him as the only prophet, the only priest, and the only king, qualified and empowered by our heavenly Father to instruct us, to atone and intercede for us, to reign over our conscience, to guide, defend, and lead us to victory. His qualification for these offices, being "the Son of God, the only begotten of the Father," renders him infinitely worthy of our confidence, [59] and constrains us to trust in him with all our hearts. To his word, as our prophet, we look for instruction; to his sacrifice and intercession we look for pardon and acceptance; and to him, as King on the throne of the universe, we yield implicit obedience, and are assured, if we put ourselves under his guidance, he will lead us to complete and triumphant victory. As we have used, and may often use the phrase "Jesus is the Christ," we thought it expedient to give this brief statement of the ideas attached to that phrase.

EDITOR.      

      MESSIAH is born in the city of David, in the awful crisis alluded to in the first essay in this number. Science had proved itself systematic folly; philosophy, falsely called moral, had exhibited its utter incompetency to illuminate the understanding, to purify the heart, to control the passions, to curb the appetites, or to restrain the vices of the world. A scepticism that left nothing certain, a voluptuousness that knew no restraint, a lasciviousness that recognized no law, a selfishness that proscribed every relation, an idolatry that deified every reptile, and a barbarity that brutalized every feeling, had very generally overwhelmed the world, and had grouped those assimilated in vice, under every particular name, characteristic of every species of crime. Amidst the uncertainty, darkness, and vice that overspread the earth, the Messiah appears, and lays a foundation of hope, of true religion, and of religious union, unknown, unheard of, unexpected among men. The Jews were united by consanguinity, and by an agreement in a ponderous ritual. The Gentiles rallied under every opinion, and were grouped, like filings of steel around a magnet, under every possible shade of difference of thought, concerning their mythology. So long as unity of opinion was regarded as a proper basis of religious union, so long have mankind been distracted by the multiplicity and variety of opinions. To establish what is called a system of orthodox opinions as the bond of union, was, in fact, offering a premium for new diversities in opinion, and for increasing, ad infinitum, opinions, sects, and divisions. And what is worse than all, it was establishing self-love and pride as religious principles, as fundamental to salvation; for a love regulated by similarity of opinion, is only a love of one's own opinion; and all the zeal exhibited in the defence of it, is but the pride of opinion.

      When the Messiah appeared as the founder of a new religion, systems of religion consisting of opinions and speculations upon matter and mind, upon God and nature, upon virtue and vice, had been adopted, improved, reformed, and exploded time after time. That there was always something superfluous, something defective, something wrong, something that could be improved, in every system of religion and morality, was generally felt, and at last universally acknowledged. But the grandeur, sublimity, and beauty of the foundation of hope, and of ecclesiastical or social union, established by the author and founder of christianity, consisted in this, that the belief of one fact, and that upon the best evidence in the world, is all that is requisite, as far as faith goes, to salvation. The belief of this one fact, and submission to one institution expressive of it, is all that is required by Heaven to admission into the church. A christian, as defined, not by Doctor Johnson, nor any creed-maker, but by one taught by Heaven, and in Heaven, is one that believes this one fact, and has submitted to one institution, and whose deportment accords with the morality and virtue taught by the great Prophet. The one fact is, that Jesus the Nazarene is the Messiah. The evidence upon which it is to be believed is the testimony of twelve men, confirmed by prophecy, miracles, and spiritual gifts. The one institution is baptism into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Every such person is a christian in the fullest sense of the word, the moment he has believed this one fact, upon the above evidence, and has submitted to the above mentioned institution; and whether he believes the five points condemned or the five points approved by the synod of Dort, is not so much as to be asked of him; whether he holds any of the views of the Calvinists or Arminians, Presbyterians, Episcopalians, Methodists, Baptists, or Quakers, is never once to be asked of such a person, in order to admission into the christian community, called the church. The only doubt that can reasonably arise upon these points, is, whether this one fact, in its nature and necessary results, can suffice to the salvation of the soul, and whether the open avowal of it, in the overt act of baptism, can be a sufficient recommendation of the person, so professing, to the confidence and love of the brotherhood. As to the first of these, it is again and again asserted, in the clearest language, by the Lord himself, the apostles Peter, Paul, and John, that he that believes the fact that Jesus is the Christ, is begotten by God, overcomes the world, has eternal life, and shall, on the veracity of God, be saved. This should settle the first point; and as to the second, it is disposed of in a similar manner; for the witnesses agree that whosoever confesses that Jesus is the Christ, and is baptized, should be received into the church, and not an instance can be produced of any person being asked for any other faith, in order to admission, in the whole New Testament. The Saviour expressly declared to Peter, that upon this fact that he was the Messiah, the Son of God, he would build his church; and Paul has expressly declared, that "other foundation can no man lay (for ecclesiastical union) than that Jesus is the Christ." The point is proved that we have assumed, and this proved, every thing is established requisite to the union of all christians upon a proper basis. Every sectarian scheme falls before it, and on this principle alone can the whole church of Christ be built. We are aware of many objections to this grand scheme, revealed by God, to establish righteousness, peace, and harmony among men; but we know of none that weighs a grain of sand against it. We shall meet them all (Deo volente) in due time and place. Some of them have been anticipated in one or two articles preceding. But of these more fully hereafter. It must strike every man of reflection, that a religion requiring much mental abstraction or exquisite refinement of thought, or that calls for the comprehension or even apprehension of refined distinctions and of nice subtleties, is a religion not suited to mankind in their present circumstances. To present such a creed as the Westminster, as adopted either by Baptists or Paido-Baptists; such a creed as the Episcopalian, or, in fact, any sectarian creed, composed, as they all are, of propositions deduced by logical inferences, and couched in philosophical language, to all those who are fit subjects of the salvation of Heaven--I say, to present such a creed to such for their examination or adoption, [60] shocks all common sense. This pernicious course is what has paganized christianity. Our sects and parties, our disputes and speculations, our orders and casts, so much resemble any thing but christianity, that when we enter a modern synagogue, or an ecclesiastical council, we rather seem to have entered a Jewish sanhedrim, a Mahometan mosque, a Pagan temple, or an Egyptian cloister, than a Christian congregation. Sometimes, indeed, our religious meetings so resemble the Areopagus, the Forum, or the Senate, that we almost suppose ourselves to have been translated to Athens or Rome. Even christian orators emulate Demosthenes and Cicero; christian doctrines are made to assume the garb of Egyptian mysteries, and christian observances put on the pomp and pageantry of pagan ceremonies. Unity of opinion, expressed in subscription to voluminous dogmas imported from Geneva, Westminster, Edinburgh, or Rome, is made the bond of union, and a difference in the tenth, or ten thousandth shade of opinion, frequently becomes the actual cause of dismemberment or expulsion. The New Testament was not designed to occupy the same place in theological seminaries that the caresses of malefactors are condemned to occupy in medical halls--first doomed to the gibbet, and then to the dissecting knife of the spiritual anatomist. Christianity consists infinitely more in good works than in sound opinions; and while it is a joyful truth that he that believes and is baptized shall be saved, it is equally true that he that says, "I know him, and keeps not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him."

EDITOR.      

      SIR--I would ask you, in the name of my calling, are you trying to raise the dead? Why do you make so much ado about primitive christianity, which I had thought had been buried together with the scriptures for sixteen hundred years? It is true, Luther, Calvin, and some others took some pains to raise some part of it, while the remainder was out of reach of their popular views, and would not be suitable to the taste that then prevailed. Now, sir, let me ask you if you are not afraid that your efforts will terminate to your injury? Were not these men as capable of judging for themselves as you are? and did they not know that modern things were better suited to modern people, than old fashions? Besides, sir, christianity has been so long buried, that it may be said of it as was said of Lazarus--it gives an offensive smell--it is disgusting to our taste. Hence, when you recommend any primitive practice, the moderns cannot endure it, but cry out, "away with it! away with it!" Do you think that it would avail any thing to tell the ladies of fashion that the old fashions were better than the modern? Would they not reply, that it makes no matter--the modern are now in vogue, and the ancient are out of vogue. Just so the people in religious matters. When I say that the bible is buried, do not mistake me--it is only the simple and plain meaning of it, that has been long since discarded.

      As for the clergy, why do you assail them? Do not you know that it is as easy to remove mountains as to convince a man that the very object of his dependance, the very thing that procures him an easy, if not a luxurious living, is all a foolish device--an imposition on the credulity of mankind? What could be more suitable to an indolent man than to have to work only one day in seven to maintain himself and family and to be esteemed too as a gentleman of the first rank; to march at the head of grand processions; to be placed in the uppermost seats in public assemblies; nay, to be placed, as you once told us, on a wooden throne in the midst of a popular assembly. I think, sir, you would betray no ordinary ignorance of human nature, if you would persevere to convince a man so circumstanced that it was the belief of a falsehood put him in such snug and happy circumstances.

      I fear, sir, you read the bible in the old-fashioned way--such as, "Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof, not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind. Neither as being lords over God's heritage, but being ensamples to the flock; and when the Chief Shepherd shall appear, you shall receive a crown of glory that fades not away." Whereas the clergy read it thus to one another, in its modern sense: "Feed yourselves on the flock of God which is among you, by constraining them to feed you if they do it not of a ready mind; taking the oversight of the flock for filthy lucre's sake, and not from a willingness to give, but from a willingness to receive. Being as lords over God's heritage, and by no means ensamples to the flock; and when we ministers sit in council you shall have double honor." I will only refer you to another instance of the modern reading, that you may be admonished to abandon the project of getting the people to read in the old style. The clergy read Acts viii. 36-39. thus: "And the parents took their child to a certain meeting-house, and said, See here is water in the basin, what does hinder us to have our infant christened? The minister answered and said, If either of you believe, it may be done. The father then answered, saying, I believe in the Westminster Confession of Faith, and Catechisms Larger and Shorter. Then the priest, the parents, and the child drew near to the basin, and after consecrating the element, the priest besprinkled the infant's face. Then the spirit of Antichrist caught away the parson and he was found in the sacred desk, and the parents went on their way with the child crying, until its tears mingled with, and washed off, the sacred dew." Unless you can get the people to read the bible in the old-fashioned way, your efforts, sir, will be unavailing. Yours truly,

STEADY SEEKTRUTH.      

[TCB 54-61]