Oldalképek
PDF
ePub

ceased to exist. What kind of Christians did the Popish missionaries make? The Abbé nowhere attempts to conceal the fact, that many of the Hindoo customs were adopted by the Romish priests, in order to meet the prejudices of the people, and so far did they go in this yielding scheme, that an order was sent from Rome, that those who had gone out to India to convert the Hindoos to Christianity, must beware lest, complying too much, the natives should convert them to Hindooism.

In fact, the natives who were baptized, were not changed even in their outward conduct; their hearts remained the seats of depravity, and in many of their gross actions there was no difference. Who can regret that the number of such deluded creatures, or their descendants, is decreasing? But how perverted must the mind of that individual be, who considers this as an argument against the spread of Christianity; Christianity has nothing to do with it; no one who believes the Bible can see the smallest similarity between the popish converts and those spoken of by the apostle Paul"But ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God."-It is an abuse of terms to call that Christian which is so plainly ANTI-Christian, and so directly opposed to the pure and uncompromising spirit of our holy religion, that I cannot help suspecting that the Abbé never knew the Christian religion, except through the corrupting medium of popish delusion and ignorance. "Let us also do evil that good may come," appears to have been the sentiment which animated all the movements of these unhappy men, at least in making proselytes to their religion, by mingling the defilements of heathenism with some of the truths of Divine revelation.

The Abbé, instead of condemning the dangerous and destructive policy of those missionaries who went before him, appears to have pursued nearly the same plans. He confesses, without a blush, that though he adopted many of their customs and manners, and did all he could to gain them over to his religion, he met with no success. But what are we to think of the man who can gravely put this forward as a powerful argument against all attempts to evangelize India ? Because the Abbé Du Bois failed in converting Hindoos, though he became half a Hindoo himself, therefore all missionaries who remain Christians, must labour without any hope of ever succeeding: such reasons, such conclusions, are worse than childish; they exhibit the features of a mind so destitute of all correct feeling respecting the great design of Christianity, that we may reasonably ask what motive could induce the Abbé Du Bois to leave Europe, and go to India to propagate a religion which, to say no more of it, is as unlike to Christianity as the worship of Baal was to the service of the God of Israel.

From what source could this missionary draw his instructions? Surely not from the word of God. There is every thing to condemn his system in the sacred volume, and if it was a crime to attempt to mingle Judaism with Christianity; if the sacred threatenings were denounced against those teachers who wished to gain the Jews by yielding to their prejudices in reference to the Mosaic economy, a system established by Jehovah himself, but which had been abrogated-what must the guilt of that man be, who, in order to gain the natives of India to Christianity, strips it of its purity, takes it down from its exalted station, and allies it to obscenity, vice, and ignorance. Success! who that loves

his God, or his fellow-men, could wish success to such a scheme of iniquity. Happy is it for India that he met with none, and may every future missionary who goes forth to the heathen with such an object in view, meet with the same disappointment.

It appears to me that the Abbé's statement forms a most triumphant argument in favour of real Christianity. It shows that God will never give his sanction to a corrupted Christianity, which may justly be considered as the worst of all religions. Our missionaries (I speak of all Protestant missionaries) go forth to the heathen, not to yield to their prejudices, but to remove them by the light of knowledge; not to assume their manners, but to teach them the pure manners of the Bible; not to adopt their customs, but to direct them to a system of morals divinely fitted to guide them in the way of righteousness; not to assure them of salvation, though they remained the slaves of sin and the worshippers of false gods, but to declare that there was no salvation but in Christ; and that there was only one God to whom divine honours were to be paid, and that without holiness no man could see his face in peace. Occupying this elevated station, and performing this glorious work, Christian Missionaries are executing the commission of their Divine Master, and preach the Gospel to every creature; marks of the Divine approbation have accompanied their labours, and the Gospel has been made, in many instances, the power of God and the wisdom of God to the salvation of man.

But the worst, and in my opinion the basest, part of his attack lies in the assertion that, though we hear much of the great success of missionaries in India, and of the number of their converts among the natives, there is no

such thing in existence, and that all they boast of is only to be found on paper.

The missionaries in India do not boast of their success in converting the natives of India, they lament that it has been so small: still they have met with partial success, and if those statements which are presented frequently to the public, and sent out to India are false, why have they not been contradicted before this time? why has no case been produced to show that the public are imposed upon in order to support a Utopian scheme? There are many, both in Asia and in Europe, who, if they could only find out one falsehood in any of the missionaries' accounts, would trumpet it forth to more than one quarter of the globe, and justly would a false statement deserve to be exposed. But it has not been done; men on the spot, and individuals who have come home to England, have abundantly confirmed the accounts of missionaries, and nothing has been detected but the extreme modesty of these men in the reports which they send to Europe.

There is one proof of success peculiar to India, and of which the Abbé ought not to have been ignorant. The Scriptures have been translated into different languages of that country. Many thousand copies have been printed and circulated; and if testimony is not believed, the most incredulous may be convinced by visiting the Biblical Library of the British and Foreign Bible Society in Earl Street, where the Bible may be seen in, at least, ten or twelve languages of India, actually translated by those missionaries who, according to this slanderer, have been sending home nothing but false statements men who, instead of seeking their own ease and honour, have given up talents, and property, and health to pro

mote this noble cause, and who, if they had done nothing more than accomplish the translation of the Scriptures, might well be esteemed the benefactors of the human race. The names of these men will descend to posterity with honour, when the poor Abbé, and all the opposers of this cause, shall have sunk into their merited oblivion.

-

The Abbé Du Bois does not appear to believe in the necessity of the Spirit's influence to give success to Christianity. He sees no need of a Divine power to change the human heart, and we are, therefore, not surprised at his other statements. This is the rock on which he stumbles.-If we view the cause of missions, as depending for success on a mere statement of pure and exalted truths, and conveyed to the minds of men merely by human instrumentality, we may indeed despair of success in India and in every other country. But this is not the case with Christians. Every one who is a disciple of Christ acknowledges in his own case, and in every other instance, the necessity of the Holy Spirit's agency to enlighten the understanding, to remove prejudice, to subdue opposition, and to sanctify the soul through the medium of the truth. He fully accords with that declaration of Scripture in reference to the success of Christian missions. "Not by might, nor by power, but by my Spirit, saith the Lord of Hosts." Taking this view of the subject, the friend of Christianity looks at the exertions of all religious institutions as depending for success on the blessing of the Most High, and believing the Divine promises, he follows, with

the eye of faith, and the anticipation of success, the steps of a faithful missionary in a heathen land. He beholds him going forth, in obedience to the command of his Divine Master, to preach "the unsearchable riches of Christ," and

[ocr errors]

while the missionary is thus enduring the privations of a foreign land, and braving the dangers of an unhealthy clime, far from the circle of endeared connexions, he expects all his success from Him who hath said, "Lo, I am with you alway, even to the end of the world.". This is sufficient for him-it bears the stamp of Divine Authority;-he has, in many instances, experienced the faithfulness of the promise, and if he had no other declaration to trust in, he would cling to this as a support in the greatest difficulties, and as an antidote against every fear.

I cannot conclude without expressing my hope that though no real Protestant can for a moment stop in his exertions, on account of the statements of the Abbé Du Bois, yet that his own communion will believe all his assertions, and acquiesce in all his reasons, and make no farther attempt to convert the natives of India. If this good is effected, we may be thankful to the Abbé for his publication, and rejoice that India is likely to be freed from the truckling and errors of Roman Catholic missionaries.We know that they have done injury wherever they have gone, and that the immense empire of China would probably have been open to the labours of Christian missionaries in our day, had it not been for the conduct of the Jesuits.

In concluding my remarks I may just observe, that Christians have every reason to rejoice in what has been done by Christian missionaries. Western and Southern Africa, and the Islands of the Southern Ocean, display the fruits of missionary labours, and seal the works with the divine approbation. Let us bear those men who are now encountering all the dangers and difficulties of a foreign land in preaching the Gospel, on our affections at the throne of grace-let us think more

[blocks in formation]

A HINT TO CHURCH MEMBERS,
GROUNDED ON MATT. xiii. 21.

"By and by he is offended.".
I see, in these words, a
"little
cloud, the size of a man's hand"
-an ox-eye cloud-a brooding
storm a tempesta hurricane
a moral tornado! "By and by
he is offended." And what then?
Then he changes countenance-
then he frowns--then his voice
alters, it becomes harsh-then his
words differ, become offensive-
then he absents himself from
private fellowship-meetings-then
he withdraws, occasionally, from
the public means then from the
Lord's table-then for good and

all.

So much, and more, is contained in-" By and by he is of fended." My soul, depend on no present smiles—confide in no present professions, however solemnly averred.

W. T.

་་་་་

SENEX.

or not, we must have it." As this is a point of some importance to Dissenters, it deserves something more than a hasty assertion. I am not aware of any legal obligation in the case; on the contrary, I believe there is no such necessity; but that it is purely optional with Dissenters, whether they will have the burial service read at the interment of their friends, or not. This may, perhaps, be shortly put to the test.

I regret that your respectable correspondent, J. C. has not made any observations on the Marriage of Dissenters. This subject is now assuming a very serious as"pect, and demands the best consideration from all classes of Dissenters. It is hoped some of your correspondents will favour us with their thoughts on this interesting topic. A. B.

[ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small]

GENTLEMEN, I shall feel obliged to any one of your Correspondents, either on this, or on the other side of the Tweed, if he can tell me

what difference there is between

the principles of the English and Scotch Independents; my attention has sometimes been directed to the subject, and I was not aware that there was any difference in doctrine, or in discipline, except that in general the Scotch Independents had weekly instead of

REPLY TO J. C. ON DISSENTERS' monthly communion. I propose

CEMETERIES.

(To the Editors.)

-

the query, because I have met with some Presbyterians, and others, who appear desirous to show that there is a considerable difference between our Scotch brethren and ourselves, and that it would be as easy for Synods and Congregational Churches to unite, as for English and Scotch Independents to become one body.

GENTLEMEN, -Without further agitating the inquiry, whether it is desirable to attach cemeteries to Dissenters' places of worship, I must beg permission to notice one part of J. C.'s paper. In my former communication I had said, "we do not need the reading of the clergy at the grave." On which J. C. remarks, "but need it AN INDEPENDENT IN ENGLAND.

Yours, &c.

REVIEW OF BOOKS.

Martin Luther on the Bondage of the Will; to the Venerable Mister Erasmus of Rotterdam. 1525. Faithfully Translated from the Original Latin, by Edward Thomas Vaughan, M.A. With a Preface and Notes. 8vo. -London: Hamilton, 1823. Martin Luther on the Bondage of the Will. Written in Answer to the Diatribe of Erasmus on Free-Will. Translated by the Rev. Henry Cole. 8vo. 10s.London: Simpkin and Co. 1823. THOUGH We have been exceedingly interested by the examination of these volumes, it is with considerable reluctance that we take them in hand officially. It is not that we have any doubt on the main doctrine, nor that we have the smallest hesitation in expressing our entire accordance with the principles of Luther, but we feel that the subject is involved in so much difficulty, that we prefer the plain and authoritative language of inspiration, to the unprofitable and unsatisfactory discriminations of men. The system usually distinguished by the name of Calvin, appears to us in its general outline to coincide more nearly with the language and intention of Scripture, than any other set of opinions connected with the Christian institute, inasmuch as it takes the sovereignty of divine grace as its grand distinction. That, in the great work of redemption, every thing is of God and nothing of man, is among the plainest dictates of Holy Writ, and we are unable to see how this leading principle can be secure on any other hypothesis. Grant us but this, and we will not be tenacious of minor points. Lay man prostrate before his sovereign and his judge; strip him, entirely and

[ocr errors]

without subterfuge, of every thing savouring of inherent power and claim, and, though there may be some difference in modes of expression, we will not anxiously contend for these, when the prinWhen the ciple is conceded. Apostle put the decisive question, "Who maketh thee to differ?"

it was nothing less than the complete annihilation of human agency as the turning point in the great concern, and the ascription of the whole of salvation to the soveand election of God. reignty

The discussion respecting the freedom of the will, appears to turn rather on a question of fact than on the niceties of theological distinction. One appeal to selfJ knowledge, one glance abroad on the general aspect of human nature, might, we should think, suffice to convince any fair observer that, call it by what name you will, there exists in man, as an essential part of his character, a perverse and unconquerable enmity against all that is good, a spirit of antipathy to the service of a holy God, and a consequent proneness to the love and pursuit of evil. A passage in Mr. Vaughan's preface, referring to this point, strikes us as peculiarly forcible. Having cited with approbation the objections urged by Locke against the common mode of stating the general question, and rejecting the distinction of the school-men between voluntas and arbitrium, he goes on as follows.

"But this false distinction opens a door to the solution of the whole difficulty. Their improper question has been,

Is the will free?' The proper question would be, Is the understanding free?' that is, has the man's will all the case before it, when he decides upon any A blind understanding given question? will lead to a false determination, though that determination be made without any thing approaching to compulsion. Now

« ElőzőTovább »