Page images
PDF
EPUB

make some observations on the words Law, and Mercy, of which you appear to me, not to have formed correct notions. The law of God is either preceptive, or natural.

The former, such

as the ceremonial laws, may be given and revoked at pleasure, as depending merely on the divine sovereignty. But natural law is unalterable. It results from our relation to God, as his rational creatures, and its obligations cannot be annulled nor abated, while this relation subsists. "It contains all those principles, which have an essential fitness and equity in them." For this cause it is called the moral Law, or, the standing rule of our life and conduct-an abstract of which we have in the decalogue. This law is positive and admits of no imperfection: the least failure in thought, word, or deed, ensures curse-The soul that sinneth, it shall die. As this law forbids all occasion of repentance, so it cannot accept of repentance as any satisfaction, Gal. iii, 10. Yet, you often speak of repentance and amendment, as perfectly answering the demands of God's law, so that he would be unjust in visiting for its transgression. This sentiment wholly rejects the atonement and righteousness of Christ, as needless and nugatory.

the

The word Mercy, you use frequently, without any determi nate meaning: sometimes, as mere human pity; sometimes as an essential attributeof the Deity, which he necessarily exercises towards sinners. But this is not correct. None of God's attributes oblige him to show pity to sinners. Mercy, in God, is a mere sovereign act under the

control of his moral perfections. It can never be deserved; nor can it ever be exercised towards men, unless they are considered as evil, and hell-deserving creatures. Its Scripture sense is, Divine Favor to the ill-deserving: God blesses where he might justly punish. I will now attend to your creed. Art. I. "I depend on the mercy

of a supremely just and good God, who is the searcher of hearts, and will, I trust, reward as we deserve."

My dear niece, I am surprised, that a woman of your fine sense should deceive herself with such an absurdity, as this article contains: you expect mercy and the reward of desert! Is it not absolutely impossible, that a sinner should be rewarded according to desert; yet find mercy? If a sinner be rewarded as he deserves, he receives just punishment, but no mercy. If a man deserve and receive favor, it is justice, but no mercy. God would be unrighteous to punish the well-deserving. Had there been no sin, God never could have exercised mercy, nor can he even now, but upon the righteousness of Christ. It is a covenanted grace to him and his spiritual seed; and none have good ground to hope in God's mercy, unless they be one spirit with the Lord, united to him by faith and love.

You deceive yourself, Matilda, in supposing mercy may be deserved. Justice, desert, and merit, totally exclude the idea of mercy. They are diametrically opposite to such an idea in all cases. This idea that sinners may deserve well of God, I have often noticed in your conversation. It is a dangerous decep

tion: Do examine it with serious attention. By sinner, I mean any one who has not perfectly observed the moral law, in thought, word and deed. All such are under the curse, Gal. iii, 10. Should an angel have a vain thought, he could never repair his transgression; for he could never love and serve God more and better than he ought, as his present duty. Consequently, he could do nothing which would count back for a past offence. Such also was the case with man in innocency; but now, as a sinner, every deed is a sinful act, in the view of the Law: The best act of the best saint is sin, in the sight of God; and, should the sinner be rewarded as he deserves, he would receive no mercy.

Such is the inconsistency of your article, on acceptance with God. And the remarks I have now made upon it bring into view the necessity of a Divine Savior, who, being possessed of divine dignity, could make attonement for our sins. As a mere creature, however exalted, he could not exceed his own present duty to his Maker. Unless Christ be really God, he has saved none from the curse of the Law; we are yet in our sins, utterly without hope either in justice or mercy. It is also worthy of notice, that though Christ be a perfect and accepted Savior in God's sight, yet, universal salvation will not follow. According to the covenant of grace in Christ, the members of his mystical body, only, have good ground to trust in the mercy of God. We must be united to him by faith and love, or die in

our sins, Mark xvi, 16. John xv, 5, 6. Rom. viii, 9. And our obedience to the laws of God will not, as you seem to apprehend, be the ground of his love to us; but the evidence of our love to him, John xiv, 15, 23. This brings me to consider

Art. II. "I know also that we must put our shoulders to the wheels, that is, we must watch and pray."

This you will recollect, was subjoined to a fling at professors of religion, as resting in their profession of faith. How much credit is due to it, in this view, I will not attempt to determine. As a detached article, it is right as far as it goes. Faith without works is dead. Where there is love, there will be faith and obedience, John xiv, 23. Yet, good works are not the ground of our justification before God, Gal. ii, 16. As means of duty to God, ourselves, and fellow men; and as evidences of love to God, and faith in Christ, they are of high estimation. Nevertheless, be it remembered, that actions externally good, may be found among those who neither love God nor man. Hypocrisy, the lust of the eye, and pride of life may produce them. We need be careful that we do not deceive ourselves, in the principle which excites us to "put our shoulders to the wheels.'

I come, in the next place, to your sneer at public professions of faith, church-covenanting, and contributions for Bibles, Missionaries, &c. But as you put in no claim for God's mercy on these accounts, and probably will never "put your shoulders to these wheels," I

merely notice it, because it is referred to in your next article, viz.

Art. III. "If I study to know God aright, and serve him truly, and practise the precept and example of Jesus Christ, to love my neighbor as myself, that is, to do by him, as I would he should do by me, I see no reason why profession and ceremony, should add to my practice."

As this article concludes your summary of faith and practice, we may soon see whether I judge ed too severely of your principles. However, as we proceed, we must carefully keep in mind, that Christianity includes the whole of natural reiigion; yet, in its own distinguishing features, rests on divine revelation. The truth of this observation is conceded on all sides; and now, agreeably to this, I am constrained to say, your article contains nothing more than natural religion. Except the bare mention of the word Christ, there is not a word to distinguish it as Christianity.

Come, Matilda, I know something of your sentiments and practice: Let us bring this article home, and see how it will bear. You tell of studying to know and serve God aright; and of following a particular precept of Christ. How have you done these? Whatever we may profess, our habitual practice will be cvidence of our principles: let us keep this observation in sight. Now, reason, or the mere light of nature, never did, and never can discover the true character of God; nor, whether he be reconcileable to sinners; nor, if reconcileable, on what terms; nor, Vol. V. New Series.

how He can be worshipped acceptably by us; 1 Cor. i. 30, 21.. These things are wholly of revelation. In this we are taught, that God is known aright, and worshipped acceptably, only, in and through Jesus Christ; that we must believe on the Son of God, and honor him as we honor the Father, with love and obedience; that none can come to the Father but by him: On all others the wrath of God abideth.

Now, my dear niece, I appeal to your practice: I appeal to your conscience. Have you ever studied to know and serve God in this way? Have you with hatred of sin, and in unfeigned trust and reliance on the righteousness of Jesus Christ, endeavored to follow his revealed will and examples? If so, how is it, that you wholly neglect and disregard the holy Sabbath, which Christ and his followers were strict in observing? Did not He who said, Thou shalt have no other Gods before me-Thou shalt not steal-Thou shalt not kill; also say, Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy? This is a precept of the moral law, as much as any other; and who is sufficient to erase it from the code of divine laws? You may with the same propriety and safety, in God's sight, reject the sixth, as the fourth commandment. The authority for both is the same. It is also, an apostolic injunction that we neglect not the assembling of ourselves together on the Sabbath as the manner of some is, Heb. x, 25.

It is also worthy of notice, that professors and believers in Christ are called his church, his body, and his members. He gave his life for them; and formed them

51

into a church state: To some, he gave Apostles; to some, evangelists; to some, pastors and teachers; for discipline, edification, and growth in grace. Matt. xviii, 15-18. Ephes. iv, 11, 12, 13.

To these ministers to the churches. Christ gave a most solemn charge to go and teach all nations, to disciple them to him, and baptise them as his property-to administer the Lord's supper for comfort and growth in grace. The command is positive, Do this in remembrance of me teach whatsoever I have commanded you-preach the whole counsel of God watch for souls as those who must give account-Be instant in season and out of season; and count not your own life dear, for he that loveth his life shall lose it-He that believeth on me (accepts my message) shall be saved, but he that believeth not shall be damned.

Now, if you be a believer in revealed religion, you know these things are true. They do not rest on human interpretation, but on plain declared facts. But to what purpose is this solemn charge and declaration of Christ, if, according to your opinion and practice, people are not bound to respect his ministers, and his messages by them: and, to confess him before men, forming themselves into church order, for instruction, edification, and discipline? Christ has not obligated himself to save those, who deny him before men, and will not come to him for life: Nor are ministers more bound to preach, than people are to hear and receive their messages from Christ. Accordingly

he commanded his ministers to shake off the dust of their feet, against such as would not hear and receive them; and declared it should be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrah than for them in the day of judgment. Yet, by rejecting public professions of religion, church covenanting, and the fellowship of saints, you reject a visible church of Christ with all its of ficers, public ordinances, and instituted means of salvation.

However, I am persuaded, you do not in your conscience believe all this account of professing, confessing, covenanting, and walking in communion with the church of Christ, a mere solemn farce; nevertheless, you stigmatize it with the name of ceremony. What, my dear niece, did Christ die for sinners, establish a visible church with public ordinances, appoint ministers to preach salvation by him, and forbid us to disbelieve his message by them, on penalty of damnation, all out of ceremony! Can you reconcile your application of this expression, either with a good conscience, or good sense? Yet, you support it with your practice! You will not publicly profess Christianity, nor encourage its public worship by your presence, nor contribute a cent to assist the suffering members of Christ to a Bible, or to any means of serving him, whom to know aright is life eternal. No, you stand aloof among the enemies of Christ; you desire no communion, and fellowship with his friends. "It is not necessary for me to profess any sect in religion." Indeed! so then, mahomedanism, paganism, and Christianity are

alike in your estimation: one as good as the other! yet, you blame me for suspecting you of deistical and infidel principles. Ah! Matilda, how can you quib. ble thus!

I have now finished my remarks on your letter, and have endeavored to compare the principle with the probable and actual fruits. My remarks, I believe, are just and strictly scriptural; therefore, I make no apology for them. But if I have any where unjustly or needlessly wounded your feelings, I am sorry for it and ask your forgive

ness.

I have taken the occasion of your letter, to enlarge on sevoral points in religion, that you and your sisters may know more fully my sentiments. I wish you and them to read, and seriously consider, what I have written. For this purpose, I beg of you to lay aside prejudice, and a little of your bigotry to reason. Mere reason, though excellent, will not lead men to heaven.

You have sadly disappointed

me.

But be not offended at my plain dealing. I will neither lie nor flatter. I have written in love and in the sincerity of iny heart, as though it were to my dearest sister. And, be my abilities what they may, I have probably twenty times the acquaintance with the subjects of this letter, that you have: for this reason, were there ro other, you ought not to be hasty in judging and condemning. The day is at hand, which will discover the truth. You and I have seen the most of our days: what remains will be on the declivity of life. Every day takes one from our number. As you walk, perhaps run, down the hill of life, you will frequently need the supports of the Christian religion; and the comforts of communion and fellowship with saints. Boasted philosophy, the arguings of mere reason, will bring you no support on a sick and dying bed: it insults the anxious soul, and leaves it wretched. You had some conviction of this truth in your late sickness; and sorry am I to find you consider that conviction the work of a distempered brain. I fear you sought rest in dry places, and finding none, returned to your former security. Do carefully consult these texts, Luke ii, 14—26; Hch. x, 24-31.

When you mentioned your intention of writing, I expected your opinion on the leading truths of Christianity-the moral character of God-the character of man, as a sinner, and how he can be saved the character of Christ, whether God, or man, or both, or neither: also Whatever you may think of a your opinion of the Bible, work of conviction, it is a divine whether it be, or be not, a rev- work, both rational and consistelation from God. A few ob- ent with the character of God. servations on these points No man can produce it; nor would have clearly decided would Satan if he could: He is whether my conjectures were too cunning to attack his own correct; and might have saved kingdom. That the work of you the trouble of this ungra- grace in conviction of sin is a cious letter. reality, I know; not only from

« PreviousContinue »