Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

instruction, and of Faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, corresponds (excepting in the mere name) with the main tenets of deists: viz. 'That we come at this knowledge [of Divine things] by innate ideas; or having the law or rule of life written or engraven on our hearts in such plain, visible characters, that whoever looks into himself, will clearly discern the great principles and duties of religion, and the several obligations he is under to obedience.' This the Lord

Herbert and others have maintained. "

Thus far J. Wilkinson. Lord Herbert to whom J. W. further refers as one of the chief champions of deism, it is allowed, speaks of "arriving at the knowledge of Divine things by INNATE ideas;" and "INNATE ideas," are the source of "Ellis's knowledge of Divine things."

G. Ashwell, the translator of the edition of 1686, from the terms in which he couches the contents of the titlepage, which has been given in page 40, had, I conceive, very different views of Tophail's work, as the extracts which have been given from his Epistle Dedicatory and his preface testify; as do also the extracts herein given from the "Theologia Ruris," describing how the contemplation of nature may lead up to nature's God. But Tophail, the author of the Arabic edition, and we may probably say the fabricator of the history of Hai Ebn Yokdan, is particularly clear on this point; for instead of representing the knowledge to which he states the hero of his tale arrived, as being attained through "innate ideas," Tophail distinctly states, as already quoted in page 54, that Yokdan was mislead by his own ideas; and would have been thoroughly and deeply fixed in his "misgrounded conceit," "unless God had pursued him with His mercy; and prevented his further progress therein by His gracious GUIDANCE."

Here then, however fabulous the history, the historian so far from adopting the deistical tenet of "INNATE ideas;"

clearly refers to a DIVINE LIGHT; and since his hero had no possible means of obtaining Divine Light from any OUTWARD source; what can be understood of Tophail's view, but that he had an idea, not only of a Divine Light, but of a DIVINE INWARD LIGHT? though as a Mahomedan he could not represent it as the "Light of Christ."

What ground then has J. W. even from the history of Hai Ebn Yokdan, to insinuate a repetition of his charge of deism, against the society of Friends? Or will he persist in the unjustifiable ascription, and complete his parallel by resolving the "preventing MERCY;" and the "gracious GUIDANCE of GOD" into Ellis's "INNATE ideas!"

By J. W.'s endeavours to draw a parallel between the principles of Friends and deism, we have a complete demonstration of his fallacious views of "Quakerism:" and I trust it may now be shown that he may as well attempt to draw a parallel between light and darkness.

The only "inward principle" professed and held up by Friends, is the "Light of Christ," "the Life," which, in the beginning, "was the Light of men;" which many of us know by experience is not at our command-is not "INNATE” -is not natural; but is DIVINE-IS HEAVENLY-Comes of and from GOD ONLY; and is independent of "the natural man," through a gift, grace, and light, offered to all.

In his strictures respecting Hai Ebn Yokdan, J. W. says: "I read much in Barclay's Apology" and "this story," "seemed to me a complete confirmation of the arguments in favour of immediate revelation."

Now these arguments and the brief mention of Hai Ebn Yokdan, are ranged by Barclay in the same portion of the Apology, consisting of propositions V and VI of "Universal and Saving Light;" and thus all the more than eighty pages, which this portion of Barclay contains, are headed throughout. In illustrating this subject, Barclay, as already stated in page

30, says:
of man's nature." Again,

[ocr errors]

"We understand not this principle to be any part we make it a distinct, separate thing from man's soul, and all the faculties of it.”

In the course of the same illustrations, R. B. says, pages 137-8, section XIII: "By this seed, grace, and Word of God, and LIGHT wherewith we say every one is enlightened, and hath a measure of it, which strives with him, in order to save him;" "we understand a spiritual, heavenly, and invisible principle, in which GOD, as Father, Son, and Spirit dwells."

In page 139, R. B. says: "We understand not this seed, Light, or Grace to be an Accident, as most men ignorantly do, but a real Spiritual Substance, [i. e. subsistance as R. B. afterwards explains,] which the soul of man is capable to feel and apprehend; from which that real spiritual, inward birth in believers arises; called the new creature, the new man in the heart."

Out of which of these passages that J. W. has read, does he deduce his calumnious charge of deism? or how, without an utter perversion of the common meaning of words, could he venture, in the face of such and many more such statements in Barclay, to pen such an extremely fallacious passage as that which says, the following quotation from Ellis “will serve to show how entirely Friends' notion of an 'inward principle,' independently of Scriptural instruction and faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, corresponds (excepting in the mere name) with the main tenets of deists ? "

Even admitting "the inward principle of Friends" to be only a "notion," an absurdity, or whatever other harsh epithet J. W. has bestowed upon it; where is the semblance between "innate ideas," and "the NOTION that this principle is NOT any part of man's NATURE; but distinct and separate from man's soul, and all the faculties of it."

But what can be thought of J. W.'s comparing deistical "innate ideas" with that "spiritual, heavenly, and invisible

principle in which GOD, as FATHER, SON, and SPIRIT dwells!" See also John xiv, 17, 23.

The distinction between possessing the blessed treasure of the Holy Scriptures, and yet not believing them, or having faith in our Lord Jesus Christ; and having that degree of instruction independently of Scripture, which may be afforded, especially to those from whom the Holy Scriptures have ever been withheld, will claim attention in the next chapter; this Section may, therefore, be concluded with one more extract from the arguments which J. W. has read respecting “Universal and Saving Light." In Section XIV, page 141, R. B. says: "We do not hereby intend any way, to lessen or derogate from the Atonement and Sacrifice of Jesus Christ; but, on the contrary, do magnify and exalt it. For as we believe all those things to have been certainly transacted, which are recorded in the Scriptures, concerning the Birth, Life, Miracles, Sufferings, Resurrection, and Ascension of Christ, so we do believe that it is the duty of every one to believe it, to whom it pleases God to reveal the same, and to bring them to the knowledge of it; yea, we believe it would be damnable unbelief not to believe it, when so declared.” Again, in the same page: "As we firmly believe it was necessary that Christ should come, that by His death and sufferings He might offer up Himself a sacrifice to God for our sins, who, His ownself bare our sins in his own body on the tree; so we believe that the remission of sins, which any partake of, is only in and by virtue of that most satisfactory sacrifice, and

NO OTHERWISE."

CONCLUSION OF THE FIRST CHAPTER.

Before we leave the character of J. W.'s strictures, the reader may expect something to be offered on their general scope and tendency, as being the language the work breathes

throughout; and which will be obvious from the combined testimony of what has been quoted and will be quoted, conjoined with the discussions which have been offered, or which may yet be offered in this Glance.

If I understand J. W. aright, when speaking in terms which appear to be very clear on the point, he owns the influence of the Holy Spirit, and even that it is our duty to pray for its abiding influence. But

I. That the administration of this influence is now to be witnessed only through the outward manifestation of the Son of God in the flesh, or the medium of Holy Scripture; which he appears to consider as "the Word," or "Word of truth."

Our Lord Himself said: "The words that I speak unto you; they are Spirit, and they are life. "I am the way, and the Truth,

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

II. That mankind have no Divine Inward Light concerning the things of God-no immediate revelation of His will, either concerning those things or their duty to Him; but may have an "impulse" such as that given to "the ravens which fed Elijah ; or men may feel a "restraint " " like that which "stopped the mouths of the lions," when Daniel was cast into their den.

Our Lord promised the Comforter the Spirit of Truth, both in the Father's name and in His own; and in the former "to abide for ever, and be "in you." John xiv, 16, 17; in the latter to " guide you into all Truth." John, xvi 7, 13.

III. That the Holy Spirit does not now perceptibly reveal Himself immediately to man; for that is one of those " principles of Quakerism," which J. W. says: "My whole soul abhors."

And yet our blessed Redeemer and Lord declared just before He suffered: "He that loveth Me, shall be loved of my Father; and I will love him, and MANIFEST MYSELF to him. "

« ZurückWeiter »