presbyterian system on the ground of infallibility, as much as the pope does his decrees, or those of the Romish church. It swears men never to be convinced that one tittle is wrong; or, being convinced, still to abide by it. It reserves to the church or assemblies the right of determining what princes are tyrannical, and what measures oppressive; and of sanctioning, or even exciting, resistance by arms to such measures and princes : which is too much like popery in respect of dethroning heretical kings, &c.-The primitive church, however governed, made no resistance when persecuted, and when all her assemblies were scattered;-nay, made no protests: and I cannot reconcile the covenant with the scriptural rules of obeying the powers that be.-It likewise implies an oath to propagate or support the presbyterian government in every part, without excepting the most forcible and intolerant measures: and it is certain from the Act, Declaration, &c. that toleration is no part of the plan even of the seceders; though they themselves enjoy their present privileges by toleration. It seems also to imply an oath to propagate the same system in other countries; not only by spiritual weapons, but by carnal power. "For these and other reasons I deem the oath itself to have been unlawful; and that the national sin of Scotland originally consisted in taking and imposing it; and that they who urged this as a reason why it was null and void were so far right, though wrong in almost every thing else. The instances in scripture of such covenanting were always confined to things previously the duty even any human inExod. xxiv. Deut. Nehem. ix, x. This of the persons thus engaging; and not only no human inventions were joined with the laws and ordinances of God, but not terpretations were annexed. xxix. 1 Sam. vii. 2 Kings xi. at least is the case except in the last instance referred to, where they are so simple as not to be questionable; and Ezra and Nehemiah were both inspired men. But the solemn league and covenant is an engagement to keep the tradition of the elders also: and doubtless many of the Pharisees were as confident that their system was right, as the covenanting presbyterians could be. Such engagements by oath to more than is evidently scriptural, and our bounden duty, are snares to men's consciences; make way for perjury; and, when enforced on large bodies of people, whose characters and judgments must differ, they must of necessity be the occasion, at least, of national sins, and of permanent discord and mutual accusations. "But, supposing the oath originally lawful, and that those who actually took it did right under the existing circumstances, and were bound by it; what authority had they to bind it on the consciences of their posterity to the remotest generations, who might be placed in very different circumstances, and perhaps be of a very different judgment? This is to perpetuate embittered religious and political controversy, entwined together, as a bequest to posterity; as if it had not been a sufficient curse to that generation.—I am answerable but for my own conduct; and for that my children only as it originates from mine. of The implied engagement of parents in baptism, or that of sponsors in our church, though exceptionably expressed, can bind to no more than a proper attention to their own duty respecting the child: and, if the parent or sponsor engage 1 for any thing that is not really included in the baptismal profession, or is merely an appendage to Christianity; the child, when adult, is under no obligation at all from that part of the engagement, and contracts no guilt in disregarding it. Being thus devoted to God, and brought up in the visible church, he is more strongly bound to be a Christian than others; and contracts additional guilt if he renounce Christianity: not because parents or sponsors vowed it, but because God calls him to it by his word-[of which he is informed, and, it is probable, continually does and says things by which he recognizes his obligation]. But, if he think the church of Scotland more pure than the church of England, in which he was baptized; or an independent church more scriptural than either; he is accountable only for the care, impartiality, seriousness, and humility, with which he examines the subject, and draws his conclusions; and the baptismal engagement in no sense binds him to continue a member of the church of England, contrary to his conscience. How then can the solemn league and covenant, sworn to in Scotland a hundred and fifty years ago, bind the present generation, or preclude them from the right of private judgment, and of searching the 1 And it is so explained in the service: "Ye must remember, that it is your parts and duties to see that this child," &c. scriptures with an unbiassed mind, and with earnest prayer to be taught in all respects what the truth and will of God are? In my opinion a more absurd notion never was held by wise and good men; nor one more inimical to the real interests, or more injurious to the credit, of Christianity. "There are many things unscriptural among all parties but all staunch men will have it that they are right in every thing.-For myself, I continue where I am, because I do not know where to mend myself; and because nothing is required of me personally that is contrary to my conscience. I do not deem myself answerable for the sins of others, either in the same nation, or the same church, except I neglect to do my duty in protesting against them, according to my opportunity, station, and call in providence: and I can here do something; whereas, by engaging in such disputes, I might do nothing, or mischief.-I am an episcopalian, but not a prelatist. I like some things in the presbyterian, and some in the independent plan; which I would adopt into my episcopal plan. Other things I disapprove. I see none [of the plans] to be jure divino ;...... and, till the Spirit be poured upon us from on high, outward forms will do little. "I have written a long letter, though very busy. You must excuse incorrectness and plain language: and believe me to be, dear sir, "Your's very affectionately, "P. S. The primitive church quietly did as they thought right, when permitted: and, when not permitted, as quietly did as they could, preferring suffering to sin, but suffering meekly. If rulers at any time favour spiritual religion, we may avail ourselves of the sunshine: but we should prepare for storms. No laws can secure [the continuancé of] spiritual religion.-If a man act, or preach, or write contrary to his voluntary engagements, without declaring that he is convinced he was mistaken, and without giving up the advantages of his engagement; he is deeply criminal. If this become common in a nation, it is a national sin. Every departure from the faith is very criminal, not [simply or mainly] because of leagues, oaths, &c. ; but because it is a contempt of God and his holy word." "Chapel Street, December 24, 1799. After detailing various circumstances respecting his Bible, and particularly concerning the copy-right being claimed, or rather seized, by a person who had no shadow of right to it, which reduced him to the necessity of either commençing a law-suit, or printing on his own account, and abstaining from publishing for some years; he says: 1 "As you mentioned the subject with apparent anxiety, I thought this statement would not be unwelcome. Though I deem myself treated with great injustice, and though thwarted in my favourite plans, with many unpleasant circumstances, my mind feels peculiarly tranquil. I Life, p. 275, 276. (282, 283.) |