Obrázky na stránke
PDF
ePub

If there have been a false religion on earth the Almighty cannot have given to man any security against imposture, but the exercise of his reasonthe free and uncontrouled exercise of his reason; and if the exercise of his reason lead him into error, as fallible reason must lead fallible men sometimes, and that error will entail punishment, where are we? who can be safe?

Rev. Dr. Bennett.—I am happy to hear that this is the last question, but not because I would not willingly protract the meeting and expend my powers upon this discussion. I shall feel exceedingly happy to be still more exhausted in it than I now am, after having been kept speaking, more or less, for three hours. But I beg to reply, that it is not merely necessary that we should employ our reason, but our reason should be employed under the influence of a right temper of mind. We all know perfectly well that when we see a child conceited, asking questions of its parents, talking in a flippant air, telling its father and its mother that it know better than they, that such a child, whatever may be its investigations, or the acuteness of its intellectual powers, is not likely to come to sound knowledge, for it must have deference to the instruction of a parent, as well as curiosity to put questions. I would then recommend the questioner— it is a serious question for us all, and I would address each one as a friend; I would recommend you, if you believe there is a God that made you and that made this universe, and will judge you at last-it is a point of reason, as well as of modesty410555/

[ocr errors]

to bow at the throne of that Being, and say, "Father of lights, shed thy light upon my benighted mind, and lead me into all truth." If instead of this we set up our judgment, and ask no counsel from on high; never retire to the privacy of the closet, never in deep prostration of soul seek to be guided into all truth, is it wondrous if a justly offended Being leave us to wander in our own delusions? and shall we at the last day have a right to accuse him, when he says, if you missed the truth, "Did you ever ask me to teach you?"

[ocr errors]

Mr. Taylor.-May I return my thanks, for the instruction you have given, and in sympathy for the fatigue you have undergone, to request that you will spare yourself? I am very much obliged and honoured, and I return you my heartfelt and respectful thanks.

Rev. Dr. Bennett.-I feel indebted to you, Sir, for the manner in which you have received what I have attempted to say. I return to you my acknowledgements for the way in which you have uttered your questions; and I most earnestly pray that you may be led to the knowledge of the true God and Jesus Christ whom he hath sent, in which consists eternal life.

London: S. Bagster, Jun. Printer, 14, Bartholomew Close.

RELIGION NO PRIESTCRAFT.

2 CORINTH. iv. 2.

"We have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God deceitfully; but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God.

“RELIGION is nothing but priestcraft," say the infidels. "It is a cunning scheme to work upon men's credulity and fears, in order to enslave the human mind, and get the command of the purse." This bare assertion is supposed to be a triumphant argument, a death blow to religion, and a sufficient reason why a rational being should pay no attention to convincing evidence, and venture into eternity reckless of the consequence.

But is this bold speech to settle the question, without farther inquiry? Are we not to look into the Bible, to examine it for ourselves? Then we shall make the infidel our priest. If his assertion is to go for proof, and his opinion is to be taken as infallible, then he will be our pope, and we have only changed one priestcraft for another, the Christian for the infidel. And who can give us security that the new pope will not, one day, use fire and faggot as freely as the old one?

L

Let us then look the charge fairly in the face. Happily for us, we can in this country say, we will read the Bible for ourselves, and see whether the charge of priestcraft so confidently flung out against it, can be proved. We will, then, not merely look into it as some do, who wish to discover there something to find fault with, but we will study it, for this express purpose, to ascertain whether it is a mere invention of the priests, or such a book as they might fairly be supposed to have made for themselves, in order to bind the yoke of their authority upon the necks of men, and be enabled to live in ease and splendour at the expense of others.

But what strange surprise seizes us on opening the book! We find no mention at all of priests. We travel through page after page, crying, where are the priests? but we cannot find them. We advance through almost two thousand years of the history of the Bible, before we meet with the word or the thing, and then catch a mere momentary glance at Melchisedec, king of Salem, and priest of the most high God; but as he was not of the order of priests of which the Scripture principally speaks, he vanishes again, and we read no more of priests, for hundreds of years.

If we believe the Bible then, we must conclude that the world was able to do without priests, for nearly twenty centuries. Does this look like priestcraft? Would priests have written such a book, to serve their own purposes? Would they have sunken themselves so low in the scale of dignity and im

[ocr errors]

portance? Would they have told the world; that it existed almost two thousand years, without them?

No; if priests had manfactured the book, to serve the craft, they would have told us that we could not live without them, that, from the beginning, they were our teachers and guides, our spiritual rulers, and intercessors with heaven; and that nature could more easily spare the sun, than society and religion could flourish without priests. Ah! the opening of the inquiry is any thing but favourable to the outcry of priestcraft raised against the Bible.

But now we come to the commencement of the third thousand years, and we find an order of priests instituted, at the Exodus of Israel from Egypt. Here the infidel thinks it is his time to triumph. Yet many shout victory before the battle is fought, and afterwards find they have to sing their song backwards. It would, however, be wise to hearken for once to the voice of the Bible.

By whom was the new order of priests appointed? Moses said he received this institution from God. "From God!" exclaims the infidel contemptuously; "that is easily said. It was all a mere pretence to gullthe people into submission." But men had common sense then, as well as infidels have now, and there are many things in the history of Israel to prove that there were others among them who aspired to the priesthood, and who were not too easily satisfied that this institution came from God.

Yet you affirm that Moses was a crafty priest, who took good care of his own interest! Not so hasty. Moses was not a priest at all; nor did he

« PredošláPokračovať »