Letters, 1820
Ldten — To Rev. T. Thomason on Publishing the ‘Hore Homiletice’ — Bztmeto from the Pn&ee to the Hors — Rev. T. Tfaomaaon on Religious Works in India — On acting with Tenderness and Caution — Clerical Education Society — Memorandum on the restoration of his Strength — To Bishop Buisess on the Hors Homiletics’ — Remaiks on a Criticism of the Bishop’* — ExtracU Som Sermons on *The New Birth’ — And ‘Justification by Works.’
1820.
CORBBSPONDBNCB, BTC.
To the Rev. T. Thomason.
«Jnfy7, 1820.
My beloved Brother —
“I havenotof late dared to take up such a sheet as this. And my letters have been few as well as short: but eleven volumes sent out to the public will plead my excuse It
is a ffreat joy to me to see. them all safely edited: it has been the chiefobiect for which I have of late wished to live; and I am now
Suite willing to depart, and be with my Lord and Saviour; though, * my life and health be yet spared, Tpropose, with God’s help, to prosecute the work, gleaning every fine passage that I can find in the inspired volume. But I have no intention of ever publishing more in my life-time. When I am gone, the public may have them if they please. They will have had abundant opportunity from sixteen volumes already published, to show whether they wish for more, or are cloyed and surfeited with what they have got Were the publication of a different kind, I should without ’ hesitation say, that I had already published a great deal too much: but from the peculiar nature of it as a book of reference, I conceive that they who like it at all, will be glad to have every fine portion of Scripture treated in the same way. But my executors will be able to judge better than I can do. At all events the clergy will derive a benefit from the voluminousness of the work; and if it lead the ignorant to preach the truth, and the indolent to exert themselves, and the weak to attain a facility of writing their own, and the busy and laborious to do more and with better effect than they otherwise could have done, I shall be richly repaid for my labor. My prayers for God’s blessing; upon it will, I hope, ascend as lon as I am able to pray at all: tor I know, that with* out His blessing, it will be published to no purpose. I am encouraged» by frequent testimonies from persons unknown to me»
respectiog the usefulnesss of my fortner work: and I fondly hope that the present will not be found inferior to that in any respect I have, at least, labored that it should not: and I rather think that it will be generally thought superior.
“I before told you the reason of my title Hor<B HamileticcB. It will be found in the Greek of Acts xx. 11,* and the adoption of the word ‘Homilies’ by the English Reformers. With such a title it will be suffered to stand on the shelf: whereas with the former title it was thrust into a cupboard.” ....
It may be proper to introduce here some extracts from the preface to this work, to exhibit the particular object Mr. Simeon nad in view in its publication.
Extracts from the Preface.
‘’It has not, as the Author believes, occurred to any divine, to supply a regular series of Discourses on the most important parts of the whole volume of Scripture; and to adapt these discourses by their general construction their simplicity and their brevity to the special service of the younger order of the clergy. It is the particular object of these volurrtes, which the Author now humbly presents to the public, to supply this deficiency in Theological writings. And he trusts this labor of love will be regarded by his brethren in the ministry, not as an act of presumption, but as a humble and affectionate attempt to render their entrance on their holy and honorable calling more easy, and their prosecution of it more useful
“The Author is no friend to systematizers in Theology. He has endeavored to derive from the Scriptures alone his views of religion, and to them it is his wish to adhere with scrupulous fidelity; never wresting any portion of the word of God to favor a particular opinion, but giving to every part of it that sense, which it seems to him to have been designed by its Great Author to convey.
He is aware that he is likely, on this account, to be considered by the zealous advocates of human systems as occasionally inconsistent; but if he should be discovered to be no more inconsistent than the Scriptures themselves, he will have reason to be satisfied. He has no doubt but that there is a system in the Holy Scriptures (for truth cannot be inconsistent with itself;) but he is persuaded that neither Calvinists nor Arminians are in exclusive possession of that system. He is disposed to think’ that the Scripture system, be it what it may, is of a broader and more comprehensive character than some very exact and dogmatical theologians are inclined to allow: and that, as wheels in a complicated matlO ON BXPOSITfON WITHOUT PABTIALITT. [cHAP. XXH.
chine may move in opposite directions and yet subserve one common end, so may truths apparently opposite be perfectly reconcilable with each other, and equally subserve the purposes of God in the accomplishment of man*s salvation. This the Author has attempted to explain more fully in the preface to his former work. But he feels it impossible to repeat too often, or to avow too distinctly, that it is an invariable rule with him to endeavor to give to every portion of the word of God its full and proper force, without considering one moment what scheme it favors, or whose system it is likely to advance. Of this he is sure, tJxat there is not a decided Calvinist or Arminian in the world, who eq.ually approves of the whole of Scripture. He apprehends that is not a determined votary of either system, who, if he had been4n the company of St. raul whilst he was writing his different i?” ties, would not have recommended him to alter one or other c his expressions.
But the Author would not wish one of them altered: he finV as much satisfaction in one class of passages as in another: aiK employs the one, he believes, aa often and as freely as the other. Where the inspired writers speak in unqualified terms, he thinks himself at liberty to do the same; judging that they needed no instruction from him how to propagate the truth. He is content to sit as a learner at the feet of the holy apostles, and has no ambition to teach them how they ought to have spoken. And as both the strong Calvinists and ArminisTns approve of some parts of Scripture and not of others; such, he expects, will be the judgment of the partisans of these particular systems on his unworthy comments; — the Calvinists approving of what is written on passages which have a Calvinistic aspect; and the Arminians of what is written on passages that favor their particular views. In like manner he has reason, he fears, to expect a measure ofSjondemnation from the advocates of each system, when treating the passages which they appear to him to wrests each for the pur||^6 of accommodating them to his own favorite opinions. He bitt%^ regrets that men will range themselves under human banners anL leaders, and employ themselves in converting the inspired writer?^ into friends and partisans of their peculiar principles. Into this fault he trusts that he has not hitherto fallen; and he unfeignedly hopes and prays to be preserved from it in future. One thing he knows, namely, that pious men, both of the Calvinistic and Arminian persuasion, approximate very nearly when they are upon their knees before God in prayer: — the devout Arminian then acknowledging his total dependence upon God as strongly as the most confirmed Calvinist; and the Calvinist acknowledging his responsibility to God, and his obligation to exertion, in terms as decisive as the most determined Arminian. And that which both these individuals are upon their knees, it is the wish of the Author to become in his writmgs. Hence it is that he expects to be al-OHAP. ZXII.] ON EXPOSITION WITHOUT PARTIAUTT. Sll
temately approved by both parties, and condemned by both. His only fear is, that each may be tempted to lay hold only of those parts of his work which oppose their favorite system and represent them as containing an entire view of his sentiments. He well knows the force oi’ prejudice, and the bitterness of the Odium Theologicum; and he cannot hope to be so fortunate as completely to escape either. But, even if assailed on all sides, he shall have the satisfaction of reflecting that it has been his wish simply to follow the Oracles of God. The Scriptures and the Church of England have been claimed by each of these two parties, as exclusively favoring their peculiar systems; and if the same comprehensive and liberal character be found in his, writings, he shall consider it, whatever may be the judgment of mere patisans, as no small presumption in lus own favor.
‘* There is another point also, in respect to which it has been his aim not to ofiend; and that is, in not so perverting the Scripture as to make it refer tQ Christ and his salvation, when no such object appears to have been in the contemplation of the inspired writer. He regrets to observe, in some individuals, what tie knows not how to designate by any more appropriate term than that (which however he uses with much hesitation) of an ultra-Evangelical taste; which overlooks in many passaged the practical lessons they were intended to convey, and detects in them only the leading doctrines of the Gospel. This error he has labored earnestly to avoid; being well assured that lessons of morality are, in their place, as useful and important as the doctrines of grace. In a word, it has been his endeavor faithfully to deliver, in every instance, what he verily believed to be the mind of God in the passage immediately under consideration: and in the adoption of (his prmciple of interpretation, he trusts for the approbation of all, who prefer the plain and obvious comments of sobriety to the far-fetched suggestions of a licentious fancy.
He wishes much that the practice of expounding the Scriptures, which obtained so generally, and with such beneficial effects at the time of the Reformation, were revived. He has in his present workintroduced many discourses constructed upon this model; and he cannot but earnestly recommend it to his yoqpger brethren in the ministry, especially those who preach three times in the week, to reserve at least one of those seasons for exposition. It is his wish, however, to guard them against a desultory manner of explaining the Scripture; and to advise that the leading point of the whole passage be the point mainly regarded; and the subordinate parts only so far noticed, as to throw additional light on that. If this caution be not attended to, the minds of the people are likely to be distracted with the diversity and incoherence of the matter brought before them. But if an unity of subject be preserved, the discourse will come with tenfold weight to the minds of the audience; who will be led, under the guidance of
912 FAMILY INSTRUCTION. [cHAP. XZU.
the Holy Spirit, to search the Scriptures for themselves, and to read them with more profit at their own homes. To this it may be added, that it is not necessary the whole passage should be read for the text: let the most striking part of it alone be introduced in the first instance; and then the whole explained, with such remarks as are Suited to impress on the mind the truths contained in it. This will be found to have been the course pursued in many of the following discourses, to a greater extent perhaps than at first sight appears.
“‘The Author has also sosght to render the work useful for families. It has often been a matter of complaint, that there existed few sermons sufficiently plain and concise for the instructions of servants; he has therefore filled up the outline of these sketches somewhat more fully than those in his former volumes, hoping that clergymen and others may find them not altogether useless as a Family Instructor
*’ In order that the agreement between the Author’s views, and what he conceives to be the views of the Church of England, may be ascertained, he begs leave to refer the reader to the four sermons on Deut. v. 28, 29, in which * The Excellency of the Liturgy’ is delineated; and to* that on 2 Cor. i. 13, wherein The Churchman’s Confession’ is considered. And to any who may wish to become acquainted with the Author’s views of what is called Evangelical Religion,^ he begs to recommend the perusal of the sermons on r Cor. ii. 2, and Psalm cxix. 128; which were written for the express purpose of exhibiting in as clear and comprehensive a manner as he was able, his opinions upon that important subject. More especially, with this object, he would entreat their candid consideration of what he has called an ‘Appeal to Men of Wisdom and Candor;’ (on 1 Cor. x. 15.) All these sermons, together with those on the Liturgy, were delivered before the University of Cambridge. These discourses, it may be added, comprehend all the topics which he considers as of primary and fundamental importance to mankind. On many otner points there exists, and will probably continue to exist, a diversity of opinion: and in writing upon the whole Scriptures, it would. not be expected but that he should occasionally touch on such topics, as they presented themselves to him in his course. But as he has endeavored, without prejudice or partiality, to give to every text its just meaning, its natural bearing, and it legitimate use, he hopes that those who dislike his expositions of the texts which oppose their particular views, will consult what he has written on the texts which they regard as the sheet-anchors of their system; and that, finding him, as he trusts they will, free from party spirit, they will themselves endeavor to shake ofFpju-ty prejudices, and co-operate with him in maintaining and extending .that comprehensive, and generous, and harmonious, as well as
devout spirit in the Church, which, he ventures to say, it has been one of the great objects of his life to promote.”
To the Rev. T. Thomabon.
Now for something better than my own
foolish matters.
I have received your reports, and first-fruits of the labors of your Tract Society. What a glorious work this is! to see so much talent called forth and comoined; in such a variety of ways, and to such a vast extent! Verily, it makes me utterly ashamed. Only I am thankful that the Liord enables me to do any thing for Him. The smallest pin driven into His tabernacle, or the badger’s skin for its covering, are accepted of God from those who can contribute no more. Every work in which you engage is so much to my heart and to my mind, that my soul appears (as far as respects sentiment) to be cast into the very same mould with vours. All your proceedings about the Orphan House — and the kind of tracts to be written for the natives — and your editing of Euclid — my soul goes along with you in every atom of it.
“I cannot at all approve of the egotism of the Christian world; if that disposition savor of zeal, it does not breathe love. Why should we be pleased with nothing but what suits our own taste? Wh V should we not put a veil over our face, if it give to our weak brethren an opportunity of nearer access to us? Why should we not feel ourselves nappy to administer milk to those who cannot digest meat? Could not Jehovah have revealed everything as plainly by Moses as by the Lord Jesus? And could not our blessed Lord have spoken more intelligibly than by parables? and Paul have gone at once to perfection, instead of dwelling so much on the first principles of the Oracles of God? But the object of all was to give that, which, in existing circumstances, was fittest for the recipients. And with such examples before us, let us not be grieved if we be blamed for treading in their steps. Even the ‘Christian community amongst you, as well as the native population, needed all that sobriety anJ caution to be exercised towards them: and the concurrence of the Christian world will pave the wdy for still further exertions, and accelerate your ultimate objects far more than any premature efforts of your own could have done. The translations of Matthew into Hindostanee and Bengalee are blessed works: and I trust that the time is not far distant when multitudes of the natives will drink water with joy out of those wells of salvation
Surely God has been very merciful in preserving your health under such an accumulation of labors. Your wicked mother however would not be sorry if a twitch in your great toe, or some temporary indisposition, were to bring you to her arms for a few
814 CLERICAL EDUCATION SOCIETY. [cHAP. ZZIL
months. This is very allowable in her; but I, who have no such (TtoQYV, sternly tell her, thai I will be contented to meet you in my Father’s house. We have got two sweet representatives; James, of my sister; and Eliza, of you.
“My strength, notwithstanding my gi*eat exertions for the last year, is quite unimpaired: so that, instead of going forth only as a quarter of a man, I have authorized the (Jews’) Society to reckon me as half a man, and to provide labor for me accordingly. I preach twice every Sunday, and with great energy; would that I^ could add also with much effect! but my chief usefulness is amongst my academic hearers.
You will be glad to hear that a third Education Society for pious young men has been established in London, (the other two are at EUand and Bristol,) and that there are already about twenty young men on the funds, all of them very excellent characters. This is an institution of mine; and, like my dear sister’s in Calcutta, may well fill my soul with joy and gratitude. The numbers of pious clergy are greatly on the increase; how it is I know not: for I do not think that either myself, or any other minister in the church is very successful in converting souls to Christ. In my mind I ascribe it,
1st. To God’s secret blessing on the nation, on account of the attempts which are made to honor Him in Britain,
•’ 2nd. To the influence of the Bible Society, which has given a kind of currency to Gospel truths.
“And now, my beloved brother, I think I have pretty well wearied you with my scrawl. Present my most Christian regards to my dear sister, and believe me, my dear brother, most affectionately yours,
“C. Simeon.
“P. S. I never touch on news or politics; but the nation is in a most dreadful state. You will have heard of the conspiracy to destroy all the king’s ministers.”
Memorandum.
On the wonderful and unexpected Restoration of my Strength.
“July 24, 1820.
“About this time last year I took a journey to Scotland, to advocate with Mr. Marsh the cause of the Jews: and within the space of ten days from my setting out on the journey, I felt my strength renewed in a most astonishing way; and as it has pleased God to continue that strength for a whole year, I now take up my pen to record for my own future benefit the circumstances as they appear to me at this moment.
‘* Fourteen years ago, through the excess of my exertions, my
voice entirely failed me, so that I was necessitated to suspend my labors for several months. On that occasion, I felt it my duty to humble myself before God, and in earnest prayer to seek the reason of the dispensation. And I think that God, in answer to my prayer, revealed it to me. I had often thought, with a kind of complacency, that as I had for many years accumulated, and was continuing daily to amass a great stock of sermons upon the finest portions of Scripture, I should, if my life should be spared to Q.U tain the age of sixty, have a fund to go to, and be able to prose* cute my work with more ease, at a time when I might expect my strength, according to the course of nature, to be diminished. My dear friend, old Mr. Venn, had suspended his labors entirely at that iperiod of life: and I thought that I also, if spared till then, might be miles emeritus. This now appeared to me extremely wrong; and it seemed as if God in this dispensation said to me, Well, if you look forward with complacency to a relaxation from labor in my service at that period, yoy shall have it now, and be altogether disabled from serving me at all, I now saw that I had sinned in entertaining such a thought, and I determined, through grace, that whatever measure of strength God should see fit to allot to me in future life, I would spend it for Him; and that whether my days should be more or less protracted, I would, like Mr. Newton, Mr. Romaine, and Mr. Wesley, die in harness.
‘* During the space of thirteen years, I had used all proper means for the restoration of my strength, but in vain: and so weak was’ I, that I could preach only once in the day, and that with a very slender voice; and after preaching I was always so reduced, as to be more like one dead than alive; nor could I during that period keep up conversation, except in a whisper; and then only for a short time. Nevertheless, as far as my strength would admit of it, I was glad to prosecute the labors of the ministry both at home and abroad. With a view to promote the welfare of the Jewish nation, I took a journey to Scotland with Mr. Marsh; purposing, however, not on any account to preach two days following, or at any time to speak at a public meeting and preach in the same day. But I did not adhere to this intention tor one single day. I went forward pari passu with my brother Marsh, and yet increased in strength daily; so that in ten days — by the time I arrived at Berwick, I Was almost as perceptibly renewed in strength as the woman was, after she had touched the hem of our Lord’s garment. During all the remainder of my journey this strength continued; and it has continued through this whole year, so that throughout the whole year I have been enabled to preach — twice a day instead of once, — with extraordinary vigor instead of in a voice that could scarcely be heard, — wjth one-fourth of the fatigue and exhaustion that was formerly occasioned by one single sermon in the slenderest voice.
‘* Now I had taken a much longer journey through the High-
316 LBTTBS TO THB BISHOP OF BT. DAYId’s. [cHAP. ZZH.
lands foar years before; I had also suspended all labor for three months by the sea-side three years before I had also gaae to Holland for three months, where my labor was very small indeed; and yet from all these relaxations I had gained no particular ao cession of strenh. What then do I collect from this remarkable dispensation? 1 consider God as saying to me, * I laid you aside* because you entertained with satisfaction the thought of resting from your labor; but now you have arrived at the very period when you had promised yourself that satisfaction, and have determined to spend your strength for me to the latest hour of your life, I have doubled, trebled, quadrppled your strength, that you may execute your desires on a more extended plan.’
“I do not approve of fancying myself more an object of God’s special care and favor than other people, and much less of recording any such conceit; (though I am not insensible of what the Scriptures teach us both to expect and acknowledge;) but this particular interposition of the Divine goodness I think I ought to see and acknowledge; and I conceive that any one, who duly considers the foregoing statement, will see that there is dignus vindice nodus; and that not to see the hand of God in this mercy would be the basest ingratitude.”
To Bishop BuRQEss, on his kind acknowledgment of a Copy of the Hor<B HomileticcB^ and his sending in return a Criticism on 1 John V. 20.
“K. C, Oct. 24; 1820.
“My Lord, —
“If it had not been presumptuous, I should have ventured to express the feelings and sentiments of my heart by addressing you, My dear Lord,
I am truly thankful that your lordship has done me the honor to accept my book, and that it in some degree meets with your approbation. It however was never intended to be criticaU any further than was necessary for practical purposes. My mode of interpreting Scripture is this. I bring to it no predilections whatever: for though I have in my mind the analogy of faith, and am aware that no portion of the Scripture, rightly interpreted, can contradict ihaty yet I never wish to find any particular truth in any particular passage. I am willing that every part of God’s blessed Word, shoula speak exactly what it was intended to speak, without adding a single iota to it, or taking from it the smallest particle of its lemtimate import. If there be a doubt which a candid mind would feel, I readily state that doubt and leave it to have its full operation against what I conceive to be the juster interpretation. It is by coming to the Scriptures with this mind, that I have been led into the views which I maintain; ‘and which no other person, as far as I am informed, has ever ventured to
maintain, in relation to the Calvinistic and Arminian controversy. Bishop Hall in ‘his Via Media occupies far different ground. It is in the exercise of this disposition that I have been led to give up, both in my sermons on * The Excellency of the Liturgy,’ and in my Appeal to Men of Wisdom and Candor, the word /rftiiyyapsaia in reference to the baptismal controversy: and it is- in the same way I have met the question of Justijication by Works. See James ii. 24.
•*In a critical work like that of your lordship’s it is highly proper to maintain every post, as far as truth and sound criticism will carry us: but even then, I love to concede everything to an adversary that can be justly required. I feel that the great leading truths of Christianity are so plain and so incontrovertible, that after every concession that can be made to him, an opponent of any one essential truth has not a leg to stand upon. One or tWo typographical errors in your lordship’s paper I will take the liberty of pointing out. In jthe first page the printer’ has put a comma after ^t*, which, if the sheet be not printed off, may be corrected. The reference, Jer. x. 9, in p. 70, should be Jer. x. 10; the citation of Rev. xix. 2, should be xix. 11. I conceive your lordship is perfectly right in referring ^ov aljidivov and to aliidiytaxo the same person; and that the o^og must designate the same person also. And I think that what your lordship mentions about the fabe Christs throws great light upon the passage, inasmuch as it shows the necessity that existed for marking distinctly that Jesu9 was the true Christ. Had the contest been oetween Jehovah and the idols of the heathen, (as in Isai. xl.,) we might more readily have conceded that top aXridtvov referred to the Father; but when we know that the contest was between the true Christ and false Christs, the reason of the last clause, which as addressed to Christians would have no literal sense, is clear, and the application of it both just and necessary. If the scope of the passage, as pointed out by your lordship, be not kept in view, the close of the epistle is, in fact, without sense or meaning; but, with the different heretics in view, its sense is plain, and its use both obvious and important.
Hoping that God in His mercy will long preserve you to be a blessing to His Church, I remain, my lord,
“Your lordship’s most affectionate and devoted servant,
«C. Simeon.”
The following is an extract from the Appeal to men of Wisdom and Candor,’ to which Mr. Simeon refers in the foregoing letter; the other passage from the sermons on the ‘Excellency of the Liturgy’ has been given before.
<’ We DOW come to itate what our views of the sabjects Tealtj are:’ Ln hj natuie hai Dothing in Um tt
We have befiife ahown, that man by natuie haa nothing in Um that it ispiriNiar
318 THE DOCTRINE OF “THE NEW BIETH,” [cHAP. XXH.
good, or good towanb €hd. Bat in. order to be made meet for heaven, he must be i epiritnallT good; that is, he must love what God Iotcb, and hate what God hates; and be, and do, what God commands. Does God hate sin in all its branches 1 be most hate it too, and loathe and abhor himself for having ever committed it. Does God love holiness 1 he also must love a holy Grod, and hol exercises, and holy aflections; and most so love holy things, as to make them the continual objects of his most earnest parsuit; in relation to everytning that is holy and heavenly, ’ the same mind must be in him that was in Christ Jesus.’ Has God required him to come as a weary and heavy-laden sinner to Jesus, and to live altogether by faith in Christ, for wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption; and to glory, not in any human strength or goodness, but wholly and exclusively in the Lord Jesus Christ 1 the man*s mind must be brought * to this, and Christ must be exceeding preaous to him in all these points of view; yea, he must ’ determine to know nothing and to rejoice in nothing, but Christ and him crucified.’ These views and these principles must not rest as mere notions in the bead, bat must be wrought into the heart and exhibited in the whole of the life and conversation.
“This change far exceeds the power of fallen man. Whatever powers you may be pleased to invest him with, they fall very short of this. A semblance of these things he may put on; but he cannot -form them really and truly in his heart This is the work of the Spirit uf God, who is promised to us for this very end; * A new heart will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you; and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will five you a heart of flesh; and I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my commandments to do them.’* As to the mode of effecting this great work, we have already observed, the Spirit is not restricted; but whenever il is truly effected, then we say, that the man is born again, and born of the Spirit; and the change that has taken place within him, we call the new birth.
“Now the question is, Whether this be the new birth or not? and whether we do right in insisting upon it as necessary to man’s salvation 1
*’ In answer to this, we reply, not onl that the Scriptures call this a new bifth, a new creation, a being born of God, and a being born of the Spirit, but that an experience of it is predicated of all who are in a state of favor with God now, or shall find admission into His kingdom hereafter. ‘If any man be in Christ, he is a new creature, or a new creation,’ says the apostle: ‘old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.’ And our Loitl, with repeated asseverations, says to Nicodemus, ‘Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of Go.’l
“These dechtrations of our Lord to Nicodemus are peculiarij strong; because the import of ‘them cannot with any appearance of reason be explained away. Some indeed nave endeavored to explain this of baptism; but I wish that those, who think it can bear that constraction, would see what sense they can on that supposition make of the whole context. Let us suppose for a moment that baptism is the new birth, and that baptism was the point which our Lord so strongly insisted on; why should our Lord, when explaining and enforcing his first assertion, so carefbll distinguish between water-baptism, and the operations of the Holy Spirit; ‘Verily, venly. I say unto thee, Except a |pan be born of water and qfthe Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of GkKil’ Here, admitting that he insisted on the necessity of teing born of water, he insisted also on being born of the Spirit, in order that he might convince Nicodemus that he spoke, not of an outward and carnal, but of an inward and spiritual, chan. Again — how can his subsequent explanations apply to baptism 1 On the supposition that he speaks of a spiritual birth, his reasons are clear and forcible; ’ that which is born of the flesh, is flesh;’ and therefore unfit for a spiritual kingdom; but ’ that which is born of the Spirit, is spirit,’ and exactly suited to that kingdom which he was about to establish. Again — If it were baptism of which he speaks, what connection has that with the wind, ’ which bloweth where it listeth,’ and whkh, though inexplicable in some respects, is invariably and infidlibly to be seen in its efiects’l If it were baptism, it would blow, not where the Spirit listeth, but where the parents and the minister list: and as for its eflecfcs, they are for the most part visible to no human beii. Moreover, how could our Lord with justice ask Nicodemus, ‘Art thou a master in Israel, and knowest not these things Y Nicodemus might have well replied, ‘Yes, I am a master in Israel, and yet know not these things: for how should I know them 1 Where are they revealed 1 What is there in the writings of filoses or the prophets that should have taught me to expect so much from baptism t God required the circumcision of the flesh as you do baptism; but he required the circuincision of the heart also; and, if there be a spiritual cha!ne of a similar nature required of us under your dispensation, and that be toe thing which you call a new birth, then I confess I ought to have had clearer views of these things, suice they were evidently incuJcated in
Ewk. zzxvL 96, 37. t John iiL 3-6.
. the Jewish Scriptures, and were Tepfeeeated also an particularly characlenzing the Mee- ■iah’e reign.’ ....
. ...” As some distbguished characters are very strong and positive upon this point, we think it not improper to enter somewhat more fully into it.
If by the term iWeneration they meant an introduction into a new gtate in which the baptized peraons have a right and title to all the blessings of salvation, we should have no controversy with them.
“If they meant that all adults, who in the exercise of penitence and faith are baptized into Christ, have in that ordinance the remission of their sins sealed to them, and the Holy Spirit in a more abundant measure communicated to them, we should not disagree with them.
“If they meant that infants dedicated to God in baptism may and sometimes do (thouffh in a way not discoverable by us, except by the fruits) receive a new nature from toe Spirit of GkMi in, and vUh, and by that ordinance, we could cordially join with them.
“But they go much farther than all this
....” With some we hope, that there is really an error jof judgment arising from the strong things which are spoken of baptism in the Holy Scriptures.. They do not consider, that, when it is said, ‘Repent, and be baptized for the remission of sins ;* those words were addressed to adults, who had just been informed, that Jesus was the Christ, and that, if they believed in Him, and became His disciples, their sins should be blotted out. Expressions of this kind were highly proper as addressed to adults; but afford no ground for the idea, that the rite of baptism is the new birth.,
‘^ We are no more disposed to detract from the honor of that sacred ordinance than our adversaries themselves; we admit, and beg you to bear in mind our admission, that great, exceeding great, benefit accrues to the soul from baptism. In many instances, where the ordinance is really attended upon in faith, and prayer is offered up to God in fiuth, we do beUeve that God bestows a peculiar blessing on the child; and, though we cannot ascertain that He does so but by the fruits that are afterwards produced, yet are we warranted from Scripture to believe, that the effectual fervent prayer of righteous people shall not go forth in vain; and that ’ whatsoever we ask, believing, we shall leceive.’ But even from the ordinanco itself we may consider great good as arising to the soul; since, as in the case of circumcision, the person is thereby brought into covenant with Gkpd. The Israelites, as a nation in covenant with God, were highly privileged; for * to them,’ as the apostle says, ’ belonged the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises.* The same, I doubt not, may be lustly said of all that are baptized: indeed, we doubt not, but that our Reformers had that very passage of Scripture in their eye, when in our baptismal service they instructed us to tnank GKmI for hiaving regenerated the baptized persons by his Holy Spirit; and, in our Catechism, to speak of children as by the ordinance of baptism ’ made members of Christ, children of God, and inheritors of the kingdom of heaven.’ These expressions are doubtless strong; and so are St. Paul’s expressions respecting the benefits of circumcision; and every blessing which he asserts to have been conveyed by circumcision, we may safely and truly apply to baptism. By the very admnaion of persons into covenant with God, they are brouyht into ariav sto/0, have a right and title to all these privileges; and by the exercise of faith in the Lord Jesus Christ they come to the actual possession of them
“But the chief source of the fore-mentioned error is, that men do not distinguish between a change of 9taU and a change of nature. Baptism b, as we have just shown, a change ofataU: for by it we become entitled to all the blessings of the new covenant; but it is not a change of nature. change of nature mcty be communicated at the time that the ordinance is administered; but the ordinance itself does not communicate it now, any more than in the apostolic age. Simon Magus was baptized, and yet remained in the gall of bitterness and the bond of iniquity, as much aft his baptism as he was before. And so it may be with us; and this is an infallible proof, that the change, which the Scriptures call the new birth, does not always and of necessity accompany this sacred oidinance. As the circumcision of the heart did not always accompany the circumcision of the flesh, so neither does the renovation of the soul always accompeny the outward rite of baptism, which shadows it forth; and if only our opponents will distinguish the sign from the thing signified, and assign to each its proper place and office, there will be — — •~-ii-»’^ end of thw controversy.’^
Roin.ix.4.
920 JUSTIFICATION BY WOSKS.** [OHAP. XZIL
Extract from the sermon on James ii. 24.
“It is olmous, that the words which I have read to joa are a deduction from a preoedinir argument- We ought therefore carefully to examine the argument itself; for it is omy t:^ a thorough knowledge of the premises that we can understand the conclusion drawn from them. Suppose that I were, as a conclusion of an argument, to say, * So then man is an vmmortal being;’ if the argument itself were not investigated, you might understand it as a denial of maa’s mortality; but, if the argument showed tnat the conclusion referred to his soul alone, the conclusion would be found perfectly consistent with an apparenflv opposite position, namely, that man is a mortal being. In like manner, if the apostle’iB argument in the preceding context be candidly examined, there will be found no real inconsistency between the deduction contained in the text, and an apparently opposite deduction which may be founded on premises altother diflerent’..
“It is said that St Paul’s sentiments and declarations on this subject an directly opposed to those of St James; since, after a long argument, he comes to this conclusion:
* Therefore we conclude, that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.’* He goes farther still, and says, that ’ to him that voorktth not but believeth in Him that Juatyieih the ungodly his fiuth is counted for righteousness.’t Now it may well be asked,
* How can this be reconciled with the foregoing statement V I answer, ‘Only examine St Paul’s argument, as you have that of St James, and you will see that there is no opposition at all between their respective assertions.’ The two apostles are writu&g on two different subjects. St Paul is proving that a man u not to seek salvation by any righteousness of bis own, but simply by faith in the Lord Jesus Christ; wheress St Jamesis proving, that the man who professes to have fidth in Christ, must show forth his faith by lus works. St Paul endeavors to convince the self-justiciary; St. James, the Antinomian; St Paul, by showing that works are nothing without faith; St James, by showing that faith is nothing without works. St Paul exalts Christ, as gtvin? a title to heaven; St James, as giving a meetness for heaven. St Paul bends the whole force of
. his mind to establish the one leading doctrine of the Gospel; St James to have that doctrine adorned. Thus, according to the two apostles, a man is justified byfaWi because byUhtia made righteous; and he is justifiea by toorks because by tkmi he ia proved righteous; and Qod in justifying him, whether on the one ground or the other, approves Ifimself both ’ a just Ood and a Saviour.’ We may render this matter somewhat mora clear by means of a familiar illustration. A scion must be ingrafted into a stock in order that it may live; and it must bring forth fruit in order to prove that it does live. Is there any opposition between these two assertions 1 None wlutever. So then with Paul I assert, that man must be ingrafted into Christ by faith, in order that he may live; and with St James I assert, that he must bring forth fruits of righteousness, to prove that he does live. Without bding ingrafted into the stock, he can luLve no life j and, if he bring not forth good works, he shows that he has no life. These two positions are perfectly compatible with each other; and so, when properly understood, are the appparently opposite positions of these two apostles.”
In referring to the statements in this sermon, towards the close of his life, Mr. Simeon writes:
‘* On all subjecU, except that of Justification by Faith, St. Paul exercised the greatest candor; but on that he would not tolerate an angel from heaven, if he brought anything erroneous. ... I think I have myself gone to the utmost verge of what is right (or rather, stated what is precisely right) in my sermon on James ii. 24. in my Horce.
* Rom. iil 38. t Rom. iv. 5.