Volume 2. Number 4. November 1, 1824, pp. 101-108.

• Essays on the Work of the Holy Spirit in the Salvation of Men--No. IV. by Alexander Campbell, pp. 101-104.
• King James' Instructions to the Translators of the Bible--with Extracts and Remarks by Alexander Campbell, pp. 104-106.
• Extracts from Letters Addressed to Elder Henry Toller, by James Fishback, Pastor of the First Baptist Church of Lexington, Ky. by James Fishback, pp. 106-107.
• Communicated from Providence, Rhode Island by Orion, p. 108.

      HOW transcendently kind and excellent is the work of the Holy Spirit in glorifying Christ, in advocating his cause, and in affording to men [101] such a gracious confirmation of that testimony, which, when believed, puts them in possession of the most certain, cheering and animating hope--the hope of immortality and eternal life! How diverse its gifts and operations! This persecuting Jew, in a moment, is converted, not only to the christian faith, but becomes himself the subject of its powers, the temple of its residence. The converted Jew, by its influence, is filled with the word of wisdom, and, while his tongue pronounces divine oracles, his finger communicates health to the incurable, and life to the dead. Another, who, yesterday, could not read an ancient prophecy or explain a Jewish emblem, to-day, filled with the word of knowledge, infallibly expounds all the secrets concealed in dark oracles, in obscure allegories, and in mysterious types of the oldest times. Another, who a moment before had no confidence in the crucified Nazarene, has that peculiar faith which impels and emboldens him to bid a demon depart, or a leprosy withdraw, in the assurance of seeing his command obeyed. Another, who, just now, ignorant of the past, and even of the present times, can, by the gift of prophecy, foretell infallibly what will happen next week, next year, or a century to come. Another, who, till now, knew not what manner of spirit was in himself, can, by the gift of discerning spirits, detect the inmost thoughts of a stranger who has put on the christian name. Another who never knew a letter, an obscure and idolatrous pagan, who never learned the grammar of his vernacular tongue, can speak foreign tongues with all the precision and fluency of an orator. And another, in the twinkling of an eye becomes an able and accurate expositor and interpreter of languages, a letter of which he never learned. Yes, all these gifts, and many more, did one and the self-same Spirit distribute to every individual, respectively, as he pleased. These glorious, inimitable, and triumphant attestations to the truth concerning Messiah, did the Spirit of God vouchsafe, as well as reveal the truth itself. And, although these gifts were not bestowed on every first convert; yet in some instances, whole congregations, without an exception, became the temple of these gifts; and, for the encouragement of the gentiles, who, for ages, seemed to be proscribed from the favors of Heaven, the first gentile congregation to which the glad tidings were announced, was filled with these gifts, and they all, in a moment, spake foreign tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.

      Let it, then, be distinctly noticed, from all these premises, that these gifts had for their object, first, the revelation of the whole christian doctrine; and secondly, the confirmation of it; and without them, no man could either have known the truth or believed it. To this effect does the apostle reason, 1 Cor. ii. 9-16. He shews that none of the princes, the legislators, or wise men of Judea, Greece or Rome, ever could, by all their faculties, have discovered the hidden wisdom, "which God had determined before the Mosaic dispensation began, should be spoken to the honor of those apostles, gifted by the Holy Spirit." For so it was written, "Eye has not seen, and ear has not heard, and into the heart of man (before us apostles) those things have not entered, which God has prepared for them who love him. But God has revealed them (those unseen, unheard, and unknown things) to us (the apostles) by his Spirit"--"Which things (before unknown, unheard, and unseen,) also we (apostles) speak (to you Gentiles and Jews, that you may know them) not in words taught by human wisdom, (in Judea, Greece or Rome,) but in words taught by the Holy Spirit, explaining spiritual things in spiritual words. "Now, an animal man, (whether a prince, a philosopher, a legislator, or a rhetorician, in Judea, Greece or Rome, by the means of all arts and sciences) receives not the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; neither can he know them, (by all his faculties and attainments,) because they are spiritually examined" (by the light which revelation and not reason affords.) "But the spiritual man (the man possessed of a supernatural gift) examines, indeed, all things; yet he cannot be examined by any animal man (because such cannot judge of the principles suggested to him by the Spirit;) for what man (who is merely animal) has known the mind of the Lord, (his deep designs respecting Jews and Gentiles, now made known to us apostles,) who will (or can) instruct him (the spiritual man.) But we (apostles) have the mind of Christ," and are able to instruct your spiritual men, with all their gifts. O! you Corinthians! How has this beautiful passage been perverted by system into a meaning the most remote from the mind of the Spirit! The translation above given is most consistent with the original, and, indeed, is the translation of Dr. Macknight, who seems to have rendered all those passages that speak of spiritual gifts, in all the epistles, much more accurately and intelligibly than any other translator we have seen. The animal man, or what our translators call a natural man, spoken of by the apostle, is quite another sort of a man than the Calvinistic or Arminian natural man. The apostle's natural man, or his animal man, was a man who judged of things by his animal senses or reason, without any revelation of the spirit; but the natural man of modern systems, is a man who possesses the revelation of the Spirit, and is in the "state of nature" as it is called. The apostle's natural man's eye had never seen, his ear had never heard, his heart never conceived any of those things written in the New Testament--our natural man's ear has heard, and it has entered into his mind to conceive, in some way or other, the things which were revealed by the Holy Spirit to the apostles. To argue from what is said of the one by the apostle, to the other, is a gross sophism, though a very common one; and by many such sophisms is the word of God wrested to the destruction of thousands.

      While we are upon this subject, we conceive we cannot render a more essential service to our readers than to detect and expose a few such sophisms connected with the work of the Holy Spirit; in doing which we will still farther illustrate the topic under investigation.

      Before coming to specifications, we shall make but one preliminary observation, viz. that in the fixed style of the New Testament, there are certain terms and phrases which have but one meaning attached to them; and when we use those phrases or terms in any other meaning than that attached to them in the sacred style, we as infallibly err, as if in using the term Jupiter, I should always attach to it the idea of a planet, whereas the author, whose work I read, always attaches the idea of a god to it. In such a case, I must, in every instance, misunderstand him and pervert his meaning.

      The first specimen (and we can only give a few specimens) we shall give is from 1 Cor. xii. "But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to [102] every man to profit withal." A thousand times is this sentence quoted to prove, and many a sermon is preached from it to show, that there is some kind of communication, afflation, or gift of the Holy Spirit given to every man to improve, or profit withal, to his own salvation. Three notable mistakes are obvious in such a perversion of the text: First, the manifestation of the Spirit denotes in this context, some spiritual gift by which the Spirit is visible, or, at least evidently manifested to be in or with the person. Secondly, the every man denotes the spiritual men only, or every one that possessed a spiritual gift; for of these only the apostle here speaks. Thirdly, to profit withal denotes that the spiritual man did not receive this gift for his own benefit especially, but for the profit of the other members of the body; as the ear or eye does not receive impressions for its own benefit merely or primarily, but for the benefit of the whole body. This is just the design of the apostle in the whole passage.

      We shall find another specimen or example of this same sophism in the 2d chapter, 4th verse: "And my speech (or discourse) and my preaching was not with persuasive words of man's wisdom, but with the demonstration of the Spirit and of power." How often do we hear the modern sermonizers praying that their preaching may come with the demonstration of the Spirit and of power, meaning thereby some internal operation of the Spirit;¹ whereas, the apostle uses these words to remind the Corinthians that his preaching was not successful among them by means of his eloquence, but because of the demonstration of the Holy Spirit; or that his mission was established by the gifts of the Spirit imparted to them, and by miracles wrought in their presence. The next verse makes this evident; for the design of this was, he adds, "that your faith might not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God," in the miracles which God empowered me to perform; for such is the fixed meaning of the term power in this connexion. "God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power." "You shall be endued with a power from on high." Those who were converted by seeing, and those who are converted by hearing of the miracles which God vouchsafed to the witnesses, their faith rests or stands upon the power of God. I know that some, to countenance the above-mentioned perversion, are wont to cite the 19th verse of the 1st chapter of the Ephesians, which reads thus: "And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward, who believe according to the working of his mighty power, which he wrought in Christ when he raised him from the dead." Here, say the populars, is a plain proof "that the power that produces faith in us is equal to the power that raised Jesus from the dead." This will serve as a third example of this species of sophistry. Without either denying or affirming the truth of the popular sentiment, as an abstract speculation, let us see whether this was the meaning of the apostle. The apostle, from the 17th verse, is declaring his prayer to God for the Ephesians; and, in the 18th verse, mentions one item of his request, viz. "that the eyes of their understanding being enlightened, they might know what is the hope of their calling, and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance prepared for the saints: and that they might know what the exceeding greatness of his power will be (in the resurrection and glorification of their bodies) with relation to us who believe (which will be similar in glorifying the bodies of the saints to what it was to raising and glorifying Christ's body) according to the working of his mighty power, which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and exalted him," &c. So that the power here spoken of is a power to be exhibited in raising the bodies of the saints, and not a power to be exhibited in producing faith; for the Ephesians had already believed.

      Another example of the same sophism we often observe in the citation of Acts vii. 51. "O! stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears! You do always resist the Holy Spirit: as your fathers did, so do you." Hence it is argued that there is some kind of operations of the Holy Spirit which are called common, and which are equally enjoyed by all men, the saved and the damned; and on this, and another saying or two, is the whole doctrine of common operations predicated. But that Stephen, who was full of the Holy Spirit and of wisdom, had no reference to any internal or external operations upon the unbelieving Jews, is most evident from the context. He shewed that his audience, as did their fathers, persecuted the prophets who spoke by the Spirit, and in resisting his word delivered by the prophets, they resisted the Spirit of God: for to resist a person's word and to resist himself, is, in all idioms of speech, the same thing. The unbelieving Jews, in resisting the testimony of Stephen and of the apostles, resisted the Holy Spirit; and many in our time, who resist the testimony of the apostles, dictated and confirmed by the Holy Spirit, do, in fact, resist the Holy Spirit. And, as in the days of Noah, the Spirit of God, by the preaching of Noah, strove with the antediluvians; so the Spirit of God, by the preaching of the apostles, committed to writing, does strive with all those to whom the word of this salvation is sent; and yet many still resist the cogency and power of the truth, and the arguments that confirm it. They did not all believe who saw the miracles, and such of the spiritual gifts as were visible; neither do all, who read or hear the apostolic testimony and its confirmation, believe it. It has, however, been shown in the first volume of this work, that the miracles and signs were written for the same purpose that they were wrought. This, indeed, needs no other proof than the testimony of John the apostle. He says, chap. xx. 30, 31. "Many other miracles Jesus likewise performed in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. But these are recorded that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God; and that believing (this) you may have life through his name."

      Curiosity inquires, How long did this age of miracles and spiritual gifts continue? It would be no matter of great consequence to settle this [103] point, and, therefore, it cannot be precisely determined. A few hints, however, on this subject, may be useful, in connexion with the design of these essays. It must be remarked, that when Peter first opened the reign of heaven to the Jews, these gifts were showered down in a more copious manner, than at any one period afterwards among the Jews. The proof of this fact will presently appear. When the same apostle Peter, who was exclusively honored with the keys, opened the reign of Messiah the King to the Gentiles, in the house of Cornelius, the Holy Spirit fell on all the congregation, as it did on the Jews "at the beginning." This phrase, "at the beginning," denotes that the Spirit of God had not fallen on the Jewish congregation, as it did on Pentecost; and from Pentecost, till the conversion of the Gentiles, such a scene was never witnessed, even by the apostle; for he could find no parallel case, to which he could refer in giving a description of it, save that which happened in Jerusalem on Pentecost. The Samaritans did not receive it in the same manner as the Jews and Gentiles received it. Until Peter and John went down from Jerusalem, after many of the Samaritans had believed and were baptized, the Holy Spirit had fallen on none of them; but Peter and John imparted it to them by laying on their hands.² In almost every other instance, if not in all other instances, the Holy Spirit was communicated by the apostles' hands; consequently, when the apostles all died, these gifts were no longer conferred; and gradually all the converts who had those gifts died also; and, therefore, these gifts did not long survive the apostles. A reason for their ceasing to be conferred will appear in our next essay, which will be devoted chiefly to the third species of evidence, which the Holy Spirit vouchsafed to the testimony concerning Christ. Correct views of the office of the Holy Spirit in the salvation of men, are essential to our knowledge of the Christian religion, as also to our enjoyment of it. On mistaken views of it are engrafted most of the extravagant systems of our times.

EDITOR.      

      [The following copy of instructions, with the extracts, are taken from Lewes' History of the English Translations of the Bible. They are here inserted, not to introduce the controversy about baptism, but to spew (what is little known) that King James actually forbade the translators of our Bible to translate the words baptism and baptize, and that these words accordingly are not translated by them. If any of our readers should doubt of the correctness of the extracts made, we refer them to the above work, that they may read for themselves.]

ED.

      "FOR the better ordering of the proceedings of the translators, his Majesty recommended the following rules to them, to be very carefully observed:--

      1. The ordinary bible, read in the church, commonly called the Bishop's Bible, to be followed, and as little altered as the original will permit.

      2. The names of the prophets and the holy writers, with the other names in the text, to be retained, as near as may be, according as they are vulgarly used.

      3. The old ecclesiastical words to be kept; as the word church, not to be translated congregation, &c.

      4. When any word has divers significations, that to be kept which has been most commonly used by the most eminent fathers, being agreeable to the propriety of the place, and the analogy of faith.

      5. The division of the chapters to be altered, either not at all, or as little as may be, if necessity so require.

      6. No marginal notes at all to be affixed, but only for the explanation of the Hebrew or Greek words, which cannot, without some circumlocution, so briefly and fitly be expressed in the text.

      7. Such quotations of places to be marginally set down, as shall serve for the fit references of one scripture to another.

      8. Every particular man of each company to take the same chapter or chapters; and haven g translated or amended them severally by himself where he thinks good, all to meet together, to confer what they have done, and agree for their part what shall stand.

      9. As any one company has despatched any one book in this manner, they shall send it to the rest to be considered of seriously and judiciously: for his majesty is very careful in this point.

      10. If any company, upon the review of the book so sent, shall doubt or differ upon any places, to send them word thereof to note the places, and therewithal to send their reasons, to, which if they consent not, the difference to be compounded at the general meeting, which is to be of the chief persons of each company, at the end of the work.

      11. When any place of special obscurity is doubted of, letters to be directed by authority to send to any learned in the land for his judgment in such a place.

      12. Letters to be sent from every bishop to the rest of the clergy, admonishing them of this translation in hand, and to move and charge as many as being skilful in the tongues, have taken pains in that kind, to send their particular observations to the company, either at Westminster, Cambridge, or Oxford, according as it was directed before in the king's letter to the archbishop.

      13. The directors in each company to be the deans of Westminster and Chester, and the king's professors in Hebrew and Greek in the two universities.

      14. These translations to be used when they agree better with the text than the Bishop's Bible, viz. Tyndal's, Coverdale's, Matthews',³ Wilchurch's, Geneva."

      "A copy of these orders or instructions being sent to Mr. Lively at Cambridge, and other copies to Dr. Harding, the king's reader of Hebrew at Oxford, and Dr. Andrews, dean of Westminster; it seems as if some other doubts arising concerning them, application was made by the vice-chancellor to the bishop of London for the resolution of them. To which his lordship replied, that "To be sure, if he had not signified so much to them already, it was his majesty's pleasure, that, besides the learned persons employed with them for the Hebrew and Greek, there should be three or four of the most eminent and grave divines of their university assigned by the vice-chancellor, upon conference with the rest of the heads, to be the overseers of the translations, as well Hebrew as Greek, for the better observation of the rules appointed by his highness, and especially concerning the third and fourth rule; and that when they had agreed [104] upon the persons for this purpose, he prayed them to send him word thereof."

      The author from which the above is extracted, observes, that the translators, in their preface to the reader, affixed to their translation, declare as follows: "They had," they said, "on the one side avoided the scrupulosity of the Puritans, who left the old ecclesiastical words and betook them to others, as when they put washing for baptism, and congregation for church: and on the other hand, had shunned the obscurity of the Papists, in their azymes, tunike, rational, holocausts, prepuce, pasche, and a number of such like, whereof their late translation (at Doway and Rheims) was full, and that of purpose to darken the sense; that since they must needs translate the bible, yet, by the language thereof, it might be kept from being understood." The same author says, "Of this translation the learned Mr. Matthew Poole has given the following character. In this royal version, says he, occur a good many specimens of great learning and skill in the original tongues, and of an acumen and judgment more than common. By others it has been censured as too literal, or following the original Hebrew and Greek too closely and exactly, and leaving too many of the words in the original untranslated, which makes it not so intelligible to a mere English reader. This last was perhaps in some measure owing to the king's instructions, the third of which was, that the old ecclesiastical words should be kept. However it be, we see many of the words in the original retained, as, hosanna, hallelujah, amen, raka, mammon, manna, maranatha, phylactery, &c. for which no reason can be given but that they are left untranslated in the vulgar Latin." This author further declares, that Nary, in his preface to the bible, (printed in 1719,) remarks, there were certain words in the scripture, which use and custom had in a manner consecrated, as, sabbath, rabbi, baptize, scandalize, synagogue, &c. which, he said, he had every where retained, though they were neither Latin nor English, but Hebrew and Greek, because they are as well understood, even by men of the meanest capacity, as if they had been English." Speaking of Wickliffe's translation, he adds, "In Dr. Wickliffe's translation of the bible, we may observe that those words of the original which have since been termed sacred words, were not always thus superstitiously regarded: thus, for instance, Matt. iii. 6. is rendered weren waschen, instead of were baptized, though, for the most part, they are here left untranslated, or are not rendered into English so frequently as they are in the Anglo-Saxonic translation."

      From the above instructions given by king' James to the translators, and the subjoined extracts, the following observations are obvious, and are submitted to the consideration of the disciples of Jesus Christ.

      1. It is evident from rule third of the king's instructions to the translators, that he forbade them to translate the old ecclesiastical words; and in rule fourth he commands, that when any word has divers significations, they should retain that in their translation which has been most commonly used by the most eminent fathers, being agreeable to the propriety of the place and the analogy of faith.

      From the first extract subjoined to the above instructions of the king, it appears that his majesty was careful that his instructions should be observed by the translators, and especially the third and fourth rules. "It was his majesty's pleasure, that besides the learned persons employed with them for the Hebrew and Greek, there should be three or four of the most eminent and grave divines of their university assigned by the vice-chancellor, upon conference with the rest of the heads, to be overseers of the translations, as well Hebrew as Greek, for the better observation of the rules appointed by his highness, and especially concerning the third and fourth rules." In the second extract, the translators, in their preface to the reader, declare that they had observed at least his majesty's third rule respecting the old ecclesiastical words. They say, they had "on the one side avoided the scrupulosity of the Puritans, who left the old ecclesiastical words and betook them to others, as when they put washing for baptism," &c. In the third extract, though highly commended (and we believe justly) by Mr. Poole, their translation was censured by some others. The grounds of this censure are, that their translation is "too literal, or following the original Hebrew and Greek too closely and exactly, and leaving too many of the words in the original untranslated, which makes it not so intelligible to a mere English reader." It is said by the author from whom the instructions and extracts were taken, that "this was perhaps in some measure owing to the king's instructions, the third of which was, that the old ecclesiastical words should be kept." He adds, that "however it be, we see many of the words in the original retained, as, hosanna, &c. for which no reason can be given but that they are left untranslated in the vulgar Latin." This author also informs us that Nary, in his preface to the bible, printed 1719, says, that "he had every where retained these consecrated words, though they were neither Latin nor English, but Hebrew and Greek." And he adds in the last extract, that Dr. Wickliffe, in his translation, though he has in Matt. iii. 6. rendered the word baptized by washed, yet these words termed sacred words, are, for the most part, left untranslated by him, or are not so frequently translated into English as in the Anglo-Saxonic translation.

      2. Let it be particularly noticed, that among those words called consecrated ecclesiastical words, and which were forbidden by the king to be translated into English, are the words baptism and baptize. This must be obvious to any person who will compare the king's instructions with the extracts made above. The king, in his instructions to the translators, rule third, commands "the old ecclesiastical words to be kept," and gives the word church not to be translated congregation, with an et cetera, as a specimen of these words. The translators, in their preface quoted above, declare that they, in order to avoid being puritanical in their translation, had put baptism where the Puritans had put washing. The also say that the puritans, by so doing, "left the old ecclesiastical words," which chiefly demonstrate that the word baptism was one of those words reckoned both by the king and the translators to be an old, a consecrated, and an ecclesiastical word. This, the translators add, was one of the puritan scrupulosities, and that they had, in their translation, avoided it. This is also proved from what was said by Nary in his preface to the bible, printed 1719. He declares, in the extract made above, that baptize was one of the consecrated words which he had every where retained in his translation, and which he allows are neither Latin nor English, but Greek. If more evidence of this fact was necessary, we might add that the author of the [105] work from which the extracts above are made, declares that these words called sacred words (of which baptism and baptize are two) were not always thus superstitiously regarded. As evidence of this, he remarks that Dr. Wickliffe, in his translation of Matt. iii. 6. rendered the phrase were baptized by weren waschen, though to his translation the old ecclesiastical words are, for the most part, left untranslated, or are not rendered into English so frequently as they are in the Anglo-Saxonic translation.

      3. From the above instructions and extracts, it is very evident that whatever the words baptism and baptize may signify in the Greek language, they are words which are not translated in our version of the bible. The king virtually prohibited their being translated, the translators declare they left them untranslated, and others allow that they are neither "Latin nor English," but Greek. This surely should rouse the attention of every one who has any regard to the authority of the Divine Saviour, to inquire what do these words mean when correctly translated into English. If they signify sprinkling or pouring, let them be so translated. Had the king and the translators been baptists, and believed that these words signified immersion or dipping, would it not have been singular that they should agree to conceal their meaning by giving us only the Greek words anglicised? If they did mean sprinkling, as is generally asserted, there surely could have been no harm in translating them accordingly, when it was both the duty and interest of those who superintended the translation to do it. Why, then, all this concealment of their signification? It is said that they were old, ecclesiastical and consecrated words. It is believed that consecrated and ecclesiastical as the king and translators esteemed them, had they meant any thing but immersion, these qualities would not have saved them from being rendered into English. But who said those words were consecrated and ecclesiastical words, which should not be translated? The king and ecclesiastics, whose practice required this pious fraud to justify their kind of baptism, or at least to conceal that their practice was unscriptural. In no place of the bible, that I remember, does God say that there are certain old, consecrated, and ecclesiastical words, which must not be translated into the English language. The translators themselves only thought that these words were consecrated and ecclesiastical, when they occurred in certain places, and when used to express the mode of christian baptism. Thus, in the following passages, where the same Greek words occur, they disregard their age, their consecration, and their ecclesiastical nature. "He it is to whom I shall give a sop when I have dipped it. And when he had dipped the sop, he gave it to Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon." "And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood, and his name was called the Word of God." John xiii. 26. Rev. xix. 13. See also Matt. xxvi. 23. in the Greek. The translators in these, and in other instances, have inadvertently, or rather unavoidably, to make sense of these passages, shown us that they believed the Greek word baptisma means dipping. It may be presumed that there were particular reasons for leaving these words untranslated where christian baptism is spoken of, unless we can make ourselves believe that in those days king James and the translators in this acted without any reasons at all. But it is not easily believed that they acted without these reasons, when it is remembered that they had every inducement to translate the words if they meant nothing contrary to their practice. It was with these old ecclesiastical words that the clergy succeeded in preserving the fascination of priestcraft. When Tyndal issued his translation of the bible, because he had in it disregarded the words which the clergy esteemed sacred, they condemned it. He had, for instance, changed charity into love; church into congregation; priest into senior; grace into favor; confession into knowledge; penance into repentance; and a contrite heart into a troubled heart. Sir Thomas Moore, who warmly espoused the cause of the clergy against Tyndal's translation, wrote a dialogue, with a view to bring it into contempt among the people. Tindal, in answer to it, (as quoted by the author from whom we have taken our extracts) thus speaks: "What made them whose cause Sir Thomas espoused, so uneasy and impatient, was, they had lost their juggling terms wherewith they imposed on and misled the people. For instance, the word church, he said, was, by the popish clergy, appropriated to themselves; whereas, of right, it was common to all the whole congregation of them that believe in Christ. So, he said, the school-doctors and preachers were wont to make many divisions, distinctions, and sorts of grace; with confession, they juggled and made the people, as oft as they spake of it, to understand it by shrift in the ear. So by the word penance, they made the people understand holy deeds of their enjoining, with which they must make satisfaction for their sins to Godward." The bible is not yet free from these juggling terms, when words are left untranslated and another meaning is affixed to them than what they originally signify, and that meaning sanctioned by very extensive practice. Whether this has originated in kingcraft or priestcraft, or in both, justice demands that it should be detected. A sacred regard to the authority of God ought to lead us to reject an error, however old, sanctioned by whatever authority, or however generally practised.

      IN order to show that faith is more than a belief, a number of absurd distinctions have been made use of upon this subject. Many distinguish the belief of the head from the belief of the heart, as if a man could perceive a thing to be true with his head, whilst in his heart he perceived it to be false. If they mean by this, to distinguish faith from love, the terms are proper; for love is not belief, but an affection of the heart. They both unite in saving faith. The Spirit of God harmonizes the head and the heart, by imparting right apprehensions to them, and suitable impressions upon them, through and by the gospel of God's grace. It is common to distinguish true faith from a historical faith, as if there could be any true faith, without believing the gospel history! The gospels written by the four evangelists, contain the history of Christ's incarnation, life, doctrine, miracles, death, resurrection, ascension, and intercession, and one of the evangelists tells us the design of this history:--"These are written, that you might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing, you might have life through his name." John xx. 31. Surely that belief, which has life eternal connected with it, must be true faith. A distinction is also made between believing the doctrine of the gospel, and receiving the person of Christ; as if Christ's [106] person was not the object of the gospel doctrine, or as if we could receive Christ in any other way, than by believing that doctrine! John says "as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God," which receiving, he explains in the following words, "even to them that believe on his name." John i. 12. For another apostle says, "you are the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus." Gal. iii. 26. And it is plain, to receive him, or believe on his name, is to believe the doctrine of the gospel concerning him; for "he that abides in the doctrine of Christ, he has both the Father and the Son." 2 John, ver. 9.

      Some describe faith to be an inward principle of grace, implanted in the heart by the operation of the Spirit, separate from, and previous to the knowledge of the word of God. But it is impossible to conceive what is meant by such a principle of grace as this. It cannot be any sentiment respecting Christ or his salvation, since it is supposed to be previous to the knowledge of the word of God, wherein alone he is revealed. Nor can it be any disposition or affection of mind towards Christ; for the mind cannot he affected with any object of which it has no knowledge; and our confession of faith snakes the principal acts of saving faith to have immediate relation to Christ, trusting on him alone for justification, &c. But the Holy Ghost is the Spirit of truth, and operates upon the mind not abstracted from the word, which is truth, or without it, but by means of it, enlightening the understanding in its doctrines, and influencing the will by its motives: so that the word itself, is the very principle established in the heart by the Spirit. Men are born of the spirit; but it is by the incorruptible seed of the word, 1 Pet. i.23. It is of his own will that God begets men to the faith; but it is with the word of truth, James i. 18. for faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God, Rom. x. 17. To suppose, therefore, that the Spirit implants faith, as a principle of grace in the heart, without the word, or previous to any knowledge of it, is unintelligible, and unscriptural, and contrary to the word of God, and the confession of Faith:--it makes the word of God of little consequence--supercedes the necessity of preaching it to sinners, or of its being read by them in order to faith; and the Spirit does not glorify the Lord Jesus Christ in his operations, as he was promised to do, in imparting it. It opens a flood-gate of wild enthusiasm, and sets aside the scripture rule for distinguishing the Spirit of truth from the spirit of error. Isai. viii. 20. 1 John v. 1-6.

      When men conceive faith to be a principle wrought in the heart by the Spirit, abstract from the word, it will lead them to look within themselves, for the operation of some spirit, very different from the spirit of truth, who speaks in the scriptures, whose work is to guide into all truth, to testify of Christ, and take of his, and show it to us. John xvi. 13, 14. It will make them seek after this inward principle, in the first instance, as the main hinge of their hope, and prevent them taking any comfort from the word till they find, or rather they fancy they find, this mysterious principle wrought in them: which, after all, seems to be only a principle of blind enthusiasm or self-conceit.

      On the other hand, when faith is confounded with its effects, and made to consist of a number of good dispositions and vigorous exertions of the mind, it limits the extent, and clouds the immediate freeness, of divine grace to the chief of sinners, by confirming it to such as are supposed to be better qualified than others. It sets the gospel ground of hope at a distance from the self-condemned, who cannot find such good dispositions in themselves, and puts them upon striving to attain them, or to exert some act in order to be justified. The consequence is, that they either, discouraged, sink into despondency, or fall into despair after much fruitless labor, or, if they obtain some fluctuating peace in this way, it is not founded on what they believe concerning Christ, but upon a better opinion of themselves, or of the dispositions and actings of their minds towards him; and in this case it signifies little, whether they call these things acts of faith, or works of the law; or whether they thank God or themselves that they are not as other men are. This is surely a wide difference between believing "that God will justify only such as are well disposed and properly qualified," and believing "that he justifies the ungodly freely by his grace, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus." Rom. iii. 24, ch. v. 5. and the effects of these two faiths are equally different. The former leads a man to seek relief to his guilty conscience, and peace with God from something to be wrought in him or done by him. The latter leads a man directly to the character and work of Christ, as the sole foundation of his justification, and of his hope and peace with God.

      Saving faith is distinguished from every other, by its object and effects. Faith cannot so much as exist without an object; for, when nothing is believed, there can be no belief. It saves in no other way than that it has a saving object; and all its influence upon the heart and life, is, properly speaking, the influence of truth believed.

      Though there can be no true faith without knowledge, yet there may be a kind of speculative knowledge without true faith. There is a wide difference between understanding the terms of a proposition, and believing the truth of it.

      Whatever men may think of their knowledge and belief of the gospel, yet if they do not in some measure perceive its excellence, suitableness, and importance to their lost condition as sinners, they do not in reality know, and believe it--it is the operation of God's Spirit that produces this.

      Christ told his disciples that the Spirit of truth, the Holy Ghost, when he came, would not speak of himself--but would glorify him. Accordingly, his operations, during the age of miracles, were all performed in glorifying Jesus Christ, and in his name. The gospel of Christ, since the days of the apostles, has been the theme he has blessed, in convincing the world of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment, and through which he has imparted saving faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. It was in the name of Jesus, all the miracles were wrought; and by the preaching of Christ, and him crucified, as he is exhibited in the record God has given of his Son, the same Spirit has exerted his power, through this preaching, its regenerating the hearts of men. Hence, it is by preaching Christ to sinners, and not the Spirit, that the Spirit operates in glorifying Jesus in their conversion. If I preach to sinners less about the Spirit, it is that they may experience the operations of the Spirit more, by preaching Christ and him crucified, which is the sum and substance of the gospel. On believers I urge the necessity of praying the Father, through the Son, for the Spirit, that he may enlighten and sanctify them, &c. [107]

      THAT Christianity is at present most grossly corrupted, many sincere and spiritual Christians see and deplore. In this town we have our share in this soul-sickening state of things. One church (one of the orthodox ones too) has in its bosom men who are notorious for profanity! This is one of that vast combination of churches which is now so active in the promotion of the modern plans of christianizing the world. If they would christianize themselves, and get rid of their abominable pride of life, and pompous religious parade, they would remove a great cause of grief from the minds of all meek and lowly Christians acquainted with them; and the more especially, seeing they pass in the christian world for orthodox ant evangelical.

      It was formerly a saying among the Baptists, "Reading, no preaching;" but they have got so now, in this place, that they can read their prayers! Yes, the Baptists in Providence, R. I. do not scruple to read their prayers! At the celebration of Independence, this novel spectacle was exhibited, for the first time here, by a Baptist minister of this town, who was selected to pray on the occasion by the Military Committee of Arrangements! This same Baptist minister wears a gown in his pulpit, and, for preaching, pronounces a very flowery oration, written at full length. He is, therefore, a tolerable Episcopalian. But if he should take a little trip among country brethren, he would find disapproving countenances there. But who would have imagined, a few years ago, that the Baptists would ever have come to this? Where is the raiment of camel's hair, and leathern girdle of John the Baptist? Ichabod may with propriety be written upon the walls of their temple.

      In one of our heterodox societies, people are taught a new birth of this nature; when the drunkard leaves off drinking, he is, in that, regenerated--and so of every thing else. Now every one that has been born of the Spirit, knows that this is not what is meant by being born again; and yet this doctrine is publicly held forth, and many embrace it. O! in what a lamentable case are blind people, when led by such blind guides!

      Our singing here, as in other places, is performed by professors and non-professors all together, headlong; and thus people are made to utter solemn lies, singing of their heavenly birth when they never experienced any; and of their love to God when they are at enmity with him. This public sham is a public shame; and why it is suffered to go on in quiet as it does, is inconceivable. It is not my place to judge; but I should dread to be in the place of that minister who should promote or consent to this abominable outrage upon common sense and the worship of God. And yet this is the universal custom among us--orthodox and heterodox; and it is enough to make the heart of a servant of God ache.

      The abomination of having men of the world meddle with the religious affairs of meetings, is here common. O Christianity! O abused gospel! you need not the hateful, polluted embraces of your enemies. If they withhold their hearts from you, their money is your affliction when proffered to you.

      As to the numerous societies of the day, things are here as in other places. Characters of the worst sort and church members mingle together, and talk of restoring the Jews, and of bringing about the Millennium, &c.--and the reverends, and honorables, and rabbies, and lawyers, and scribes, (I go no further,) trumpet their wonderful doings in the papers, and get their names upon these rolls of immortality. I see not how these people can teach the world Christianity, seeing they do not appear to understand it themselves. And I should suppose that the members of those societies who are not Christians, would be more consistently employed in healing themselves before undertaking to heat others. It is truly ridiculous that men, who know nothing about religion, should be zealously engaged in missionary matters. It seems to me this is the most foolish age that has ever yet been.

      So much for the fountain. The streams which flow from it may be expected to be like it.--Worldly policy, ambition, and vanity, seem to be the governing principles throughout. "Young men are sent to college to get qualified to preach! One way to learn to preach with a witness!--How edifying must it be to the mind of the young theologian to read the obscene and idolatrous Pagan tales of antiquity! How favorable an influence must the wanton legends of yore have upon him! And to see the vanity, lightness, self-importance, and apparent want of devotion of great numbers of those designed for the ministry, is enough to sicken and sadden the heart of every serious, humble Christian.

      The foregoing is but a glance at a few things--but it is enough to show us that the Christian world is in a wretched, wretched state. O for the Spirit to come and make searching work among Christians! Instead of being in a prosperous condition, the Christian world is daily getting worse; and there is, at present, scarcely any pure Christianity on the earth; and yet, our college divines will come in with their sophistry, and try to snake us believe that things are going on finely! Out upon such nonsense, I say. I do not believe that a brown loaf is a leg of mutton.

ORION.      

[TCB 101-108]