Recommendatory Letter
To the Chairman of the Executive Committee of the Board of Publication of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church, in the United States:
Reverend and Dear Brother,
It is extensively known that the pious and eminently useful Dr. Thomas Scott, the Commentator, who for a number of years, occupied so high a place in the confidence and affections of the friends of evangelical truth and of vital piety, entered the sacred office, without any practical acquaintance with the religion of which he undertook to be a teacher. For several years after his ordination, and after he had made the solemn subscription to the thirty-nine Articles, &c., required of those who are received into the Ministry of the Church of England, he was, in spirit and in creed, a Unitarian and Pelagian, and deliberately acting upon the most selfish and worldly principles in all his studies and
pursuits. From this dream of proud self-confidence it pleased God to awaken him, by a series of events apparently accidental; to lead him to renounce his errors one after another, and eventually to enable him to repose and rejoice in that precious system of free and sovereign grace, which once he despised.
With the account which he has himself given of this change in his views under the title of “The Force of Truth,” you have been long acquainted; and, if I mistake not, more than one edition of this account has, within the last twenty years, been given to the American public. Still the work has not that general circulation which its deeply interesting character renders desirable. I could earnestly wish to see it take a place among the volumes issued by our Board of Publication, and finding its way to every Presbyterian family in the land. I am persuaded it is in your power greatly to extend its circulation; and, in my opinion, it is hardly possible unduly to multiply the copies of a work so eminently adapted to illustrate and magnify the grace of God.
What though the venerable Author of this narrative belonged to a different ecclesiastical pale from that in which it is our happiness to find ourselves, and to labour? This circumstance does not, with me, form the least deduction from its value. Perhaps it may be said to be one of the chief glories of that system which we adopt, as Presbyterians, that it turns away the minds of men from an undue regard to the external forms of the Gospel, to that simple purity of evangelical truth, which is “the power of God unto salvation to every one that belie veth;” that it guards us against the miserable worship of heartless rites and genealogies, as a ground of hope towards God, and teaches us to place all our confidence on the atoning sacrifice and perfect righteousness of “Him who, through the eternal Spirit, offered himself without spot, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God.^’ May it ever be so! I regard every man as my brother in Christ, however he may differ from me in other respects, who teaches me to “glory in nothing save in the cross of the Lord Jesus Christ;” and who represents salvation, in its beginning, its sum, and its completion, as wholly of free, rich, and sovereign grace “abounding, through righteousness, unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord;” and who, while he unceasingly proclaims, that my title to heaven rests solely on the ground of the atonement and righteousness of the Redeemer as my surety, ceases not to insist that my preparation for heaven can be effected only by the renewal and sanctification of my heart by the power of the Holy Spirit, and inclining me to “deny ungodliness and worldly lusts, and to live soberly, righteously and godly, in this present evil world,” and to walk before God in all the ways of holy obedience.
When, therefore, I open the volumes of such men as Scott, and Newton, and Cecil, I entirely forget the system of Prelacy with which they happened to be connected, and drink in the precious streams of evangelical and experimental truth which they pour forth, without thinking that they belonged to a different fold from myself; or rather feeling that they and I belong, in reality, to the SAME Church, the same precious body which the Redeemer has purchased with his blood, and sanctified by his blessed Spirit. Let my soul be with the souls of such men, in whatever ecclesiastical connection they may be
M M B found, and by whatever name they may be called! If the inspired Apostle Paul presich.- ed the true Gospel, these men preached it, for their language and spirit are all as exactly his, as if he spoke by them. The remark made, many years since, in regard to their great predecessor, the celebrated George Whitefield, of the same ecclesiastical connection with them, applies here with equal force. More than seventy years ago, while that “prince of preachers “was daily addressing admiring crowds in the city of Philadelphia, a group of his opposers was seated in the Coffee-house in that city, listening to an animated harangue of Mr. P. who sustained an important office, and a high secular character. He was loading the person and the ministry of Mr. Whitefield with abuse, and warning his hearers against his alleged errors and fanaticism. In the midst of this harangue. Dr. Chovet, an eminent physician, but a bold and profane infidel, entered the Coffee-house, and, after listening for a few minutes to the violent language of the speaker, broke out upon him in the following homely but pointed style:” P. I am surprised at you! You profess to believe the
New Testament. Now I do not; but you do. I am amazed that you can speak as you are doing against a man who preaches as Whitejield does. I do not undertake to decide who is right and who is wrong, for I consider it all as a fable; but if the Apostle Paul was right, Whitejield is right, for he preaches as much like him as if Paul had spit him out of his mouth.” The verdict of the coarse and blunt infidel was undoubtedly correct. I can never open the pages of Scott, or those of the affectionate friends, contemporary with him, already named, without feeling confident that, if the holy Apostle of the Gentiles were now to rise from the dead, and revisit our earth, he would, without hesitation, recognize them as sincere and enlightened fellow-disciples, and fellow-workers in the cause of their common Master.
It is no doubt true, that the doctrines usually denominated Calvinistic, which JDr, Scott slowly, but firmly embraced, are every where unpopular, and ever will be so as long as human nature remains what it is. All men are by nature proud and self-righteous, and whenever their minds are turned towards the great question concerning the way of salvation, they are prone to imagine, that they can, in part, at least, if not in whole, save themselves. When, therefore, they hear doctrines proclaimed which lay the sinner in the dust before God, and ascribe all the glory of his salvation, from first to last, to the merit and power of Christ; when they hear it maintained, that “by the works of the law shall no flesh living be justified,” but that we are “justified freely by the grace of God, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus,” they are offended. They cannot consent utterly to renounce their own merit and strength, and to accept of salvation as a mere gift of free and sovereign grace. “The carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.” Almost every where, then, the popular voice is against the genuine doctrines of the Gospel; and if the question, whether they are true or not, were put to vote before the mass of society, the decision would probably be two to one, if not three or four to one against them. If the Bible be true, the human heart is on the side of error. We are all, by nature, Pelagians,ox semi- Pelagians, until the grace of God teaches us better. This fact, however, instead of being a solid objection to the doctrines in question, obviously furnishes one out of many proofs that they are of God. For the word of God every where declares that ^’ the truth as it is in Jesus,” is distasteful to the carnal heart; that to the children of this world it is every where a “stumbUng block and foolishness.” Of course, if the doctrines for which we plead were generally acceptable and popular among the unrenewed and worldly, it would show conclusively that they were not such as the apostles preached.
D7 Scott found this attestation given to his new creed, as soon as his having embraced it was made known. The great majority of his early friends and acquaintances, especially the wealthy, the refined, the honourable, almost with one voice condemned it, and considered him as a sort of degraded man. Only a small number, and those by no means among the world’s favourites, felt prepared to approve the change, and to bid him “God speed.” So it was in the beginning; so it is now; and so it ever will be, as long as man is by nature an “alien from the commonwealth of Israel, and a stranger to the covenant of promise.”
It is generally known that the brother in the ministry with whom Mr. Scott corresponded, while his mind was undergoing that conflict which issued in his conversion, was the venerable John Newton, whose works have been so eminently popular and useful among the friends of vital piety. This correspondence undoubtedly had no small influence among the means which were blessed to the benefit of Mr. Scott. In most of the editions of “The Force of Truth” which I have seen, the name of Mr. Newton is not given. I hope, if your committee should concur with me in judging that this work ought to be made one of the standing publications of our Board, that they will introduce that venerated name at full length in its proper place. I can think of no good reason why it should any longer be withheld.
It is an interesting fact in the history of the following “Narrative,” that, in drawing it up, the author consulted William Cowper, the celebrated English poet, his friend, and, at that time, his neighbour. The eminent talents, the ardent piety, and the deplorable mental sufferings of that great and good man, from a morbid physical constitution, are well known to every admirer of genius where the English language is spoken. That he gave to this work his friendly supervision; that he advised in regard to its style and arrangement; and that he gave to the whole his cordial imprimatur, will be regarded with interest by every intelligent reader.
One suggestion more. Allow me to recommend that the eight letters of Mr. Newton, addressed to Mr. Scott, while he was anxious and inquiring, be added at the end of the volume. They are so excellent, both in matter and manner, that they are well worthy of accompanying the narrative with which they were, historically, so closely connected. They may be, in a few cases, in a small degree abridged, if there be a fear of swelling the volume too much. I am persuaded that all its readers will thank you for the addition. Scarcely any religious -letterwriter ever exceeded Mr. Newton. Ttiose in question, in particular, have one excellence which renders them a model in this class of writings. Forty-nine fiftieths of all the controversial writings on the subject of religion, that I have ever met with, in the course of a long life, have been by far too polemical in their language and spirit. That is, they too often reminded the reader, however decent, and even polite the style, of “the tug of war.” JNewton had the rare talent of arguing with an errorist with so much paternal benignity, as well as force, and of conducting all his controversial arguments with such constant practical appeals to the heart, as entirely to disarm the polemical spirit. This is a happy art; or rather, I should say, a precious gift of grace, which nothing but a large measure of the Spirit of Christ can enable any man with entire success to exhibit. We are never so likely to convince and win an adversary, as when we can so address him as to make him forget that we are arguing against him, and ‘Open his whole heart to our affectionate appeals. Newton had this talent in as great a degree as almost any man ever had.
Dr. Scott YiB.^ given a very satisfactory note in regard to the popular use of the name Methodist, as a term of reproach in England. If our reading population were as familiar with the state of things there as here, nothing more would be necessary; but as they cannot be supposed to be, I will take the liberty of adding one word of caution. In this country the name Methodist is never applied to any other religious denomination than that which was originally founded by the Rev. John Wesley. Whereas, in England, this name is applied, not merely to the Wesley an body, but also to all ministers and members ever so closely connected with the established church, who hold evangelical sentiments, and contend for the reality and necessity of heart religion. Dr. Scott had no connection with the Wesleyan Methodists. He was as much opposed to their Arminianism as any Calvinist in the land. Still, in that country, where the name in its popular application, is generic, rather than specific, he was constantly reproached as being a Methodist.
Persuaded that you will concur with me in my general estimate of this work, and hoping that you will be disposed to adopt it as one in your catalogue of publications, I am, reverend and dear sir.
Your brother in Christ,
Samuel Miller.
Princeton, Jan. 12, 1841.