Obrázky na stránke

authority or command, but from the very nature of the principle. It is here, and you cannot hide it; it goes forth, and will go forth It is light, and you cannot make it dark; you may, indeed, light your candle and put it under a bushel; but if you put it on a candlestick, it will give light to all who are in the house. Such is its nature-the rays will flow from the centre, and it is folly to expect anything else. It follows, that if a person is a Christian, the world will find it out; if he have true faith in his heart, this faith will cause him to do something, by which he will be exposed and known. There is, then, no such thing as having Christ's religion to ourselves-no going masked to heaven, no night passage there; no tunnelled, underground, road to that place. We are aware, there are those who love to talk about religion as something altogether between their own souls and God. They tell us, that they do not put it on their foreheads, nor write it on their garments. And we ask who does approve of ostentation in such matters? But we say, if it be so, always and everywhere a hidden thing, it is a dead thing. If you keep it thus a secret, it is because you are ashamed of it-ashamed to have it known. We infer this, both from the nature of the principle, and from the teaching of its great Author. He that confesseth me before men, him will I confess. Here is the test; if you have it, you will show it; if you show it not, you have it not. If there is nothing seen, there is nothing inside.


Another point worthy of notice is, the simplicity and palpableness of this test. Every one can apply it, and settle the matter with a good degree of assurance, whether he is a Christian or not. Some may not have the ability to go into a thorough analysis of their feelings-their love, faith, penitence, and decide upon the genuineness of these as mental states. But they can decide whether they love to do good; whether the inward affection breaks spontaneously forth, in deeds of self-denial, acts of kindness; whether theirs is a life of piety, because they love such a life, they love the company of the pious-the prayer, the praise, the worship of God's people, the heavenly communion. would think it comparatively easy to determine, whether the heart, in the tide of its affections, flows freely in this direction. If so, can there be any mistake as to what is the character in God's sight. We might hesitate, in pronouncing upon the quality of a tree, from the soil it grew in, from the form it took, from the beauty or fragrance of its blossoms, or even from analyzing the sap that circulated through it. But the moment we saw the fruit, and handled and tasted it, and found it to be unquestionably good fruit, we exclaim on the spot, that it is unquestionably a good tree.

It is further suggested by the principle we are considering, that the religion of Christ-the religion of faith, holds a vast pre-emi

nence over all other systems or associations, as a religion of beneficence. It exceeds everything else in the mode of its operation. The good deed springs from, and is a part of the good principle; the life of beneficence flows right out of the heart made right, and it will flow, if the heart continues to beat. In this way, there is certainty to the beneficence. God implants the faith and love; these impel to the labor of doing good, and make the labor a pleasure; and not only so, but this labor of doing good reacts, and makes still better the heart which gives the beneficent impulse.

There are ways of doing, by the force of example-doing it because others do it; by a regard to reputation, it would be considered mean not to do something; by some sort of association, we meet, and organize, and agree together to do good, and so do it by the bonds of a constitution. God's way, Christ's way, the way of faith, is to do it right out of the character; and this is the better way for the greater extent which is reached by it. All other ways are limited, local; being founded on some form of selfishness. They mostly proceed upon the old heathen plan of loving those that love them, and of lending with the hope that they shall receive as much again. The law of faith contemplates no clan, nor class, nor reciprocity; but says, "Do good unto all To the narrow, niggardly question, "Who is my neighbor?"-it points in reply to a world in ruins, and says, "To these distant and spreading millions all, are ye debtors."


God's way by faith is better for its tried character, its age, and perpetuity. There have been other modes, and styles, and fashions; now this way, now that; now this object, now that. Plans, and schemes, and clubs, have risen, and flourished, and passed away. But this way, by faith and love, is the same yesterday, to-day, and through all time; perfectly simple, and mightily powerful. It is doing good because the heart has faith, and, therefore, will make us, and we cannot help it, for our blessedness is in it. It was Abraham's way; it was Paul's, and Luther's, and Baxter's, and Howard's, and Wilberforce's. Nearly all the good to lost and suffering men has been done thus; and all yet to be done, will be in the same way-through the same law, and principle, and urgency of faith living in the heart.

We are forcibly reminded, in this discussion, of the high importance of works in our religion. They authenticate it as from God. Let there be the works which faith would dictate, and there would be nothing like it anywhere else. They would justify and establish its claims before all reasonable men. They also honor religion-bring to it the respect and homage of the ungodly; hate it they may, despise it they cannot. While works confer authority and respect, they give it influence among men. When men see, in this light, the evidence of its truth, and are

convinced of its truth, then, of course, are they brought into a condition to be smitten by its power. Works also give power to the individual Christian. They show him honest in the name he has taken; they justify the profession he has made. Men know that he is a disciple of Christ, because he bears much fruit. His works give weight to his character, and force to his appeals. Then the works themselves are angels of mercy; they are blessings where they fall; eyes to the blind, feet to the lame, life to the dead. They spread the word, and help bring down the Spirit, and the dead in sin live for ever.

Well, then, would it be for all who have taken the name of Christ, well for the cause of our Master, well for the world we live in, could we say, "By works we are justified and not by faith only." It is too much by faith only; that is, the cold, dead faith, the mere demon's faith, which believes and trembles. There is certainly no comfort in this faith, and no good done by it. But let any one get the true kind, and he cannot have too much of it, nor make too much of it. Whoever gets the true kind, the living faith, the loving, working faith, may, if he pleases, make it all in all, and say, by faith only; for it is the basis and the building the beginning, the middle, and the end-the first thing and the last. It is because we either have it not, or have it stintedly, that we are such miserably stupid, sleeping, drones in God's kingdom. Only get this, Christian reader, and you will feel yourself another man, and find yourself in a new world.

Be sure and go to the right source for it. Such a light and flame can come from no spark of your own kindling. It must come from heaven's altar; it is the gift of God-to be sought by the importunities of a soul, that appreciates, and longs for the blessing, and will pray, and wrestle, and still struggle on, till the blessing comes; till the faith is given.



By Prof. TAYLER LEWIS, LL.D., University of New York.

It has become quite the fashion to speak in disparaging terms of the religion and philosophy of the eighteenth century. Even the infidel transcendentalist, the pantheist, the Fourierite, and all the "children of the mist" join in the cry. It was a soulless age, they say. It had no faith,-none in the divinity of humanity, none in the incarnation of ideas. It had no faith in the unity of being, in the one in all, and the all in one; in the holiness and inspiration of nature; in the at-one-ment of the finite and the infinite, or in the profound trinity of law, spirit, and development. Those who have a more positive creed than this, reproach it for its latitudinarianism, its Gallio-like spirit, and, in a word, its dead religious indifference. Its philosophy, in like manner, is denounced as sensuous, its science as superficial, its ethics as utilitarian, and its preaching as little better than an exposition of the best parts of heathen morality. In one respect, however, it may claim a merit which certainly does not belong to its sister of the nineteenth. It was comparatively a modest age. If it had

1 The writer of this article deems it due to himself to state, that it was prepared by special request, for another periodical of a secular character, but professedly devoted to conservative principles, both in morals and politics. There being in view a class of readers somewhat differing in the main, from those of a professedly religious magazine, every effort was, therefore, made to keep the article clear of any peculiar theological language, or of any offensive manifestation of peculiar doctrines, except so far as they might be suggested by the very name of Chalmers, or might necessarily associate themselves with any expression of earnestness in religion. At. the same time, it was intended to give the article as serious a tone as possible, and, in this way, make it most useful to those for whom it was at first designed. The most general grounds were taken, in which it was supposed that all serious believers on the name of Christ, however different their opinions, might cordially unite. It was, however, thought to manifest, after all, too much of a peculiar aspect for its. first destination, and was, therefore, transferred to its present position.

The fact of its having been thus intended for a different class of readers, is presented as accounting for its apparent apologetic tone, and that somewhat studied use of general language, which might seem out of place under present circumstances. Reference is had mainly to what is said of Chalmers' conversion, and to the remarks about revivals of religion. It is hoped that this statement may be deemed a sufficient apology for what, under other circumstances, would seem only an uncalled for and unjustifiable attempt to clothe common religious ideas in a sort of philosophical garb, and to present so sacred a theme, as the work of Divine grace in a Christian's experience, in the light of a mere philosopical phenomenon. The writer would boldly say, that for such a species of affectation, or for any such unwarranted assumption of the philosopical in place of the religious style, no one can have a deeper contempt than himself. However much he might wish to avoid the appearance of religious cant, he has a much greater abhorrence of that most wretched thing which has been, not inaptly, styled "cant without religion.”


no great faith, it did not boast of things beyond its measure. had little to say of progress, and, yet, amid all its minifidianism, the world and the Church did make substantial advance. We were not the less carried onward in our course during this age, because it paused, as we may say, to consider the past rate of motion, and to examine carefully some part of its machinery and the line of its direction, before again dashing onward with a velocity, which, unless regulated by such retrospections of the sober, though much abused common sense, might have its only termination in universal scepticism. It might, we think, be shown, that some of the positions assumed by the philosophy and religionism of the eighteenth century were absolutely necessary to prevent the present from becoming a decidedly and universally infidel age.

No doubt, then, in some of its most prominent aspects, it is rightly characterised as exhibiting, in appearance at least, a lack of faith. Still, what there was of this divine conservative principle, was solid and sincere. It made no transcendental show; it made but little boast of its spirituality; it was too honest to preach beyond its experience. It patiently gathered up, and was thankful for all the external evidence of Christianity, while it had little to say of any illumination of faith, or of any inward sight which had no connexion with the homely world of sense, or the more ordinary and outward relations of humanity.

In the reaction from the high-wrought fervors of a former age, it became suspicious of any appearance of enthusiasm. To avoid the manifest dangers of false feeling, it sought to suppress even that which was rational and true. Hence there was a more secular manifestation, not because men, and literature, and philosophy, had really become much more worldly than they had been before, or than they are now, but because that which presents the opposing aspect had, after many conflicts, retired for a season within itself. There remained, however, more religion than met the eye, or ear, or was even boasted of in the writings of the Church. What there was of it, as we have said, was sincere and true. Even its infidelity was far more honest than our own, as appears from the fact that it was then willing to be called by its right name. The two sides were much more fairly marshalled in the fight. The question was openly respecting the Scriptures. One side attacked and the other defended them as the very citadel of religious truth. There was no thought, on either side, of a faith without the Bible, or more transcendental than the Bible, any more than of a rejection of the Scriptures which should, on this very account, assume to itself the name of the most transcendent faith. And so also in respect to its philosophy. Homely as we may think the system of Locke, sensual and sensuous as some may call it; false as we may believe it to be in some of its fundamental positions, yet we cannot help feeling that, after all, John

« PredošláPokračovať »