et nous verrons s'ile auront l'audace et la bassesse de la trahir." There are numerous passages to the same effect. We see no reason to doubt the correctness of these statements: they represent precisely the condition of things, which, both from the history of their secret proceedings in 1705, and from the language of their late apologist, M. De Ferney, we should be taught to expect. Well; the pastors had now released themselves from the yoke of subscription to the Helvetic Confession and they seem to have indulged their liberty, such as it was, by teaching just what they pleased. But their emancipation was not yet complete the ancient Catechism still remained, and still formed a part of their collegiate instructions. What then was to be done? Were philosophical and liberalized bodies, which had rejected the Creed of their church, to be fettered by its Catechism? Not so thought the Company of Pastors: and accordingly, somewhat more than sixty years ago, they proceeded to suppress it; and to substitute for it another, modified if not "á la Socinienne," as one opponent says, at least we may say upon the same sort of liberal principle which had renounced the yoke of the Helvetic Confession. The government, however, was not exactly prepared for the measure; and, under their authority, the old Catechism retained its place. But its days were numbered and before the year 1776, it was superseded by Östervald's, corrected by M. Vernet. : The catechism now used represents the Saviour simply as a Messenger from Heaven, as the firstborn among all creatures, to whom we owe not adoration, but respect. "On y fait cette question," says M. Empaytaz, "Que resulte-t-il de ce que nous avons dit de la personne de Jesus Christ? Et l'on repond, Que nous devons etre penetrés pour lui de respect." notions generally prevalent at Geneva, and the downward course of the ecclesiastics, we might refer, with the writer above cited, to the Liturgy printed in 1807, and to the translation of the Bible in 1805. In the Liturgy there is no recognition of the Divinity of Christ; and the confession of faith which asserts that doctrine, and which was formerly published at the end of the Bible, the Gospels, the Psalms, and the Liturgy, was suppressed in the Bible of 1805, in the Psalms of 1780, and in the New Testament of 1802. As to the translation of the Bible published in Geneva in 1805, the pastors and professors who undertook this work seem to have had it for their object to make it Arian at least, if not Socinian. Many passages relative to the Divinity of Christ have been altered, and give a sense totally different from the former translations. Such are, 2 Cor. v. 19: "God was with Christ," instead of (ev) “in Christ." 2 Peter i. 1: "Of God and of our Saviour;" instead of "of God and our Saviour; or as it should be, "Of Jesus Christ, our God and Saviour; Te Jee nowy kat own, Inge Xpise. John iii. 13: "The Son of man, who was in heaven," instead of, who is in heaven (ó ✩v). John viii. 5: "Before Abraham was, I was;" instead of I am: ɛyw εut, the incommunicable name by which God revealed himself to man. We should cite, as another instance of their fairness, Acts xx. 28: "The church of the Lord, which he has purchased with his own blood," were it not that they would fall back upon Griesbach's TO KUρ instead of 78 98. We shall not yield to this authority: but while we have such proofs, either of gross ignorance or of * Would it not save these critics some difficulties, if they were to translate, who shall be, or will be; which is to the full as correct as was? Why I was? why not I shall be ? We recommend it to these translators to For additional evidence of the consider the matter. wilful dishonesty, we forbear to press them with questionable arguments. This translation of the Sciptures has not, we believe, been extensively circulated; and those who pay any attention to the description given of it by M. Empaytaz, a person well qualified to decide upon its merits, will join with us in the hope that it never will. "Les pasteurs qui ont été chargés de ce travail, ont porté un esprit presque tout humain dans la traduction de ce livre se divin; ils ne rendent pas les pensées des écrivains sacrés dans leur antique et primitive simplicité; ils donnent au texte une physionomie moderne; ils ne gênent point pour supprimer ou changer des expressions et des tours de phrases conservés dans toutes les autres traductions; ils se permettent même parfois d'affaiblir le sens des passages où il est question d'un fait surnaturel ou d'un mystére; presque à chaque page ils ne se font fait aucun scrupule de mettre leur opinion dans le corps du texte, et de rejeter le texte à la marge par forme de notes; en un mot, livrés à l'influence de leur esprit plutôt qu'à celui de la revelation, ils semblent traduire moins chrétiennement que philosophiquement." Histoire, p. 15. The conclusion to which these facts would bring us might, after all, be unsatisfactory, if it could be shewn that sound views of religion were inculcated or encouraged in the instructions given, by the professors and pastors, in their respective departments, and in the theses of the students. It might not indeed be easy to account for such a mixture of orthodox and heterodox opinions; but we should at least acknowledge, that the evil was not so sweeping and so universal as it might otherwise be deemed. Unhappily this consolation is not left to us. As to the sermons of the pastors, it appears, that from the year 1761 to the year 1815, with the exception of two individuals *, who are therefore considered, by the Company, as men " d'une opinion exaltée," somewhat enthusiastic, these Namely, the pastor Dejoux, in one of his printed sermons; and the pastor Moulinie, in a discourse delivered in 1810. ministers, in all their published collections, have left nothing but obscurity and uncertainty as to the great doctrine of the Divinity of Christ. Since that time, it must be admitted, there has been in this respect a very considerable improvement; and there are now among the pastors of Geneva not a few who boldly avow, and feelingly preach, this doctrine. But M. Empaytaz goes through the published sermons of the Genevese pastors in detail from 1761 to 1815, a hundred and ninety-seven sermons, and avers that, although many of the subjects of these discourses led naturally to the doctrine of Christ's Divinity,if the preachers had believed in it, there is not one in which that doctrine is brought forward; a doctrine quite as profitable as ingenious dissertations upon the health of the body, Christian amiableness, the art of seeing objects on the favourable side, the art of extracting good out of evil, &c. &c. In this remark of M. Empaytaz, our readers, we think, will agree with him. Neither is the case improved by reference to the public theses. In 1777, under the presidency of M. Jacob Vernet, pastor and professor of theology, a young candidate for the ministry maintained in his theme, under the direction of his master, and in presence of the ministers of the Gospel, that Jesus Christ is not to be considered as equal to the Father, but as inferior to him both by nature and by will and obedience. He rejected the expression, consecrated since the very birth of Christianity, "God the Son," because it seems to make him equal to God the Father; and he dares to assert that we ought not to render to the Son the same degree of honour as to the Father. And what did the venerable Company* on the "In the Established Church of Ge neva there are about twenty-five pastors, who serve the five churches of the city according to a system of rotation. These, with the country pastors of the Canton, constitute the venerable Company; and, with occasion? Doubtless, it exclaimed loudly against such an attack upon the Helvetic Confession! Not at all. The venerable Company kept itself very quiet: it issued no remonstrance whatever; and from that day to this, amidst the vast number of theses which have been discussed, not one has ever been consecrated to vindicate the Divinity of our blessed Lord, from the increasing blasphemies of those who have assailed it. If the details, which we have hitherto given, belong rather to the last century than to the present, they serve at least to shew what has been for a considerable time the prevailing character of the church at Geneva, and prepare us for occurrences at that place, in our own days, which it would otherwise be difficult to explain. We proceed now to the consideration of these events; and we fear that the process of delinquency among the majority of the present rulers of the church will not exhibit them as much better than their fathers. wound his conscience*, and departed from the city. The pamphlet by that gentleman, entitled "Considerations sur la Divinité de Jesus Christ, addressèes à MM. les Etudians de l' Auditoire de Theologie de l'Eglise de Genève," &c. which has already been cited, was published after these occurrences. Our knowledge of it arises from the copious quotations in the "Histoire Véritable." But the light had broken forth, and it was not easy again to extinguish it. The venerable Company seem to have been exceedingly troubled as to the course to be pursued. To sit still, however, was to yield to the rising spirit of reformation, and they determined to bestir themselves. Accordingly, after due deliberation, they issued certain regulations, bearing date May 3, 1817, which they hoped would be received on both sides as articles of peace. This document is far too important to be omitted. We subjoin it as translated in Mr. Haldane's Letter to M. Chenevière. Our readers will find the original in M. Chenevière's "Precis des Debats," p. 22. In the year 1813, a few pious individuals began to meet in private for the purpose of seeking and cherishing that holy truth which imbued with a spirit of humility, peace, "The pastors of the Church of Geneva, was banished from the public assemblies. This little company was directed by some students of theology, the most assiduous of whom was the individual mentioned above, M. Empaytaz. The venerable Company soon heard of these unauthorised proceedings, and lost no time in marking their disapprobation of them. M. Empaytaz was especially marked out as the object of their displeasure: and they refused to ordain him, unless he would avoid every religious assembly which had not their sanction. He chose rather to incur their anathema than to the addition of some lay-elders and government officers, they form the Consistory. There is also a class called Ministers: these are young men who have gone through the studies of the academy, and have been approved and ordained by the Company." Smith's Vindication, &c. p. 40. and Christian charity, and convinced that the existing circumstances of the church, entrusted to their care, demand, on their part, wise and prudent measures, have resolved, without giving any judgment on the following questions, or restraining in any degree the liberty of opinion, to require the students who desire to be set apart for the Gospel ministry, and the ministers who aspire to exercise the pastoral functions, to enter into the following engagement:-We promise, as long as we reside, and preach in the canton of Geneva, to abstain from discussing, either in whole discourses, or in parts of our discourses, the subjoined topics: The Lausanne Gazette of June 11, 1816, observes on this occasion, "C'est à tort que le Journal des Débats a récemment cité M. Empaytaz comme ecclésiastique Génevois: il s'était, il est vrai, destiné au ministère dans sa patrie, mais un arrêté ayant exclu de la consécration les membres des sociétiés religieuses non approvées, M. Empaytaz préféra le charme d'une système a l'etat qu'il avait embrassé." Histoire Veritable, p. 4, note. "3dly, The Operation of Grace, or Effectual Calling. 666 4thly, Predestination. "We engage also not to oppose in our public discourses the sentiments of any minister or pastor on these subjects. "Lastly, We promise, that if we should be led to mention these topics, we will do so without expatiating on our own views, or departing more than is unavoidable from the words of the holy Scriptures.'" pp. 85, 86. This document suggests many reflections not eminently favourable, either to the Christian principle and fairness of the ruling party among the pastors who proposed it, or to the consistency of the orthodox ministers who were induced to conform to it. Is it exactly honest to represent as a point in dispute "the manner in which the Divine nature is united to the Person of Jesus Christ," when the real question was the Divinity itself of our Redeemer*? The truth is, and the whole history of the case proves it to demonstration, that this enactment was to proscribe and shut out from the pulpits of Geneva, the doctrine of the Divinity of the Son of God; the declaration of the natural state of man, as a fallen creature; and the exhibition of the grace of God, in the sanctifying operations of the Holy Spirit upon the heart. The tendency, and the design of this contrivance, was to impose silence upon the ministers respecting the peculiar and essential doctrines of the Gospel, and to render the system of Christianity as lifeless, and as "rational," as was the creed of the majority of the pastors. We have it on the authority of the Consistory itself, in its "M. Empaytaz ne leur a pas fait une querelle d'Allemand sur la manière dont la Nature Divine est unie á la nature humaine dans la personne de Jésus-Christ. Il les accuse textuellement de ne plus professer le dogme de la Divinité de JésusChrist, et il les en convainc par des citations de leur catéchisme, de leur dernière traduction de la Bible, par le silence de leurs sermons, par la suppression des anciennes confessions de foi dans tous les livres liturgiques." Histoire, p. 25. CHRIST. OBSERV. No. 299. address to the Council of State, on the case of M. Malan, that "the doctrine, in particular, of the influences of the Spirit on the minds of individuals," is not contained in the sacred writings; and that it is "attended with incalculable danger; in the first instance exciting pride, and afterwards urging on to the excesses of fanaticism.' There is not, as it is well observed by one writer on this subject, an Atheist or Deist in the world, who will not cordially unite with the Genevese Consistory,in decrying the influences of the Holy Spirit on the minds of individuals, as exciting pride, and urging on to the excesses of fanaticism. But, to pass over the Jesuitism of this instrument, and the attempt to obtain peace by the awful sacrifice of fundamental Christian principles, we should be glad to ask these philosophers, what they think of so flagrant an invasion of the dictates of common sense and of natural right? How are the quality and quantity of these explications to be measured? To what other rule, than the will of the dominant authority, is the case to be referred? And is not the whole scheme a trap, which could be used at pleasure by arbitrary power? In point of fact, was it not so used? The venerable body congratulate themselves, that they are released from the yoke of subscription to the Helvetic Confession; and they impose a yoke, which shuts out the preacher from some of the most important doctrines of the Gospel*. They even compel him to engage, that he will not oppose, in his public discourses, the sentiments of any + minister "Elle" (the venerable Company), says a spirited writer, " renonçait a sa profession de foi, et elle faisait signer des promesses! Elle se moquait des anciens formulaires, et elle en établissait de nouveaux! Elle déclarait que l'esprit de la réforme est un esprit de liberté, et elle enchaînait l'enseignement!" Histoire, p. 69. +"Nous promettons aussi de ne point combattre dans des discours publics l'opinion de quelque pasteur ou ministre sur ces matières." 4 T or pastor on these subjects! He must submit, therefore, not to the fixed and understood dogmata of a written confession, but to the arbitrary notions of every individual pastor of the dominant body. If, for instance, it should please M. Chenevière to say, that we are born innocent; or a second pastor to declare, that our Lord and Saviour is to be treated not with adoration, but only with respect; or a third ruler of the same freezing fraternity, to deny the influences of the Holy Spiritnot that "they would in any degree restrain the liberty of opinion!"the conscientious Christian teacher is not at liberty, in the free republic of Geneva, to oppose their sentiments in his public discourses! What is to be done, when two existing pastors of the present venerable Company happen not to be of one mind? The young minister is not informed: all he knows is, that he must not, at his peril, venture to contradict either of them! The modesty of the venerable body is about equal to its discretion: they refuse to subscribe to the confession of their fathers, through pure love to religious liberty: they bind down to their own individual, and even conflicting, opinions, the future ministers of their communion, through regard to uniformity of doctrine*. Let Protestantism, in its wildest vagaries, produce another instance of similar conduct, and we will then admit that M. Chenevière and his brethren have more to say "Ce qui met le comble à l'absurdité de cette promesse, dit-il, c'est que l'on ne veut pas que le prédicateur moderne combatte, dans des discours publics, l'opinion de l'un des pasteurs sur ces matières, et voilà que les membres de l'église qui ont attaqué l'infaillibilité du pape veulent que l'on croie à celle de leurs opinions; en sorte que, si deux pasteurs professent des systêmes contraires, que l'un parle de Jésus-Christ dans le sens d'Arius et du catéchisme moderne, et que l'autre s'explique suivant les confessions de foi admises, il faudra que les aspirans au ministére respectent egalement ces deux doctrines diamétralement opposées, et gardent la neutralité sur une matiére si im. portante." Histoire Veritable, pp. 33, 34. in their behalf, than it has hitherto been our fortune to discover. Following the order of time, we are next to notice, as a further proof of the downward course of the church at Geneva, the appointment which took place in 1818 to the chair of theology. The circumstances are thus stated: It is the custom with candidates for the ministry, to deliver, previous to their election, some discourses in country parishes; these discourses having been first submitted to the examination of the professors. About the end of 1817, or the beginning of 1818, M. Duvivier, student in theology, delivered a sermon of this sort; in which the doctrines of original sin and the Divinity of Christ were asserted in a manner not at all to the taste of the pastors. His discourse had been submitted for approbation, according to custom: but it so happened, that only two of the professors had examined it; namely, M. Fontanes, who concurred in the views of the preacher, and M. Picot, professor of Divinity, who, although suspected of Socinianism, was of an advanced age, and of a temper too pacific to alallow of his acting with harshness. The venerable Company, being informed of the scandalous discourse (discours scandaleux), pronounced byM.Duvivier,and wishing to prevent such disorder (un pareil desordre) in future, decreed, that henceforth the Committee of Censure, should consist of, at the least, three professors. To complete the measure, they induced M. Picot, on the alleged ground of his advanced age, to resign, and chose for his successor, M. Chenevière, whose wellknown opinions, says our author, offered a guarantee, that he would not, by any dangerous indulgence, render himself an accomplice of such persons as M. Duvivier. The Council of State ratified the nomination; and the effects of it were seen in the speedy exercise of authority, and the strong arguments of power, in aid of the prevalent |