The Young Man Perplexed by Religious Controversy

‘• What is truth?’’ John xviii. 38.

Such was the momentous question which Pilate proposed to the illustrious and holy martyr who then stood as a prisoner at his bar. It has been said there are two things in the Scripture account of this circumstance which surprise us — the silence of Christ, and the indifference of his judge. It is surprising that Christ should not answer such a question — and no less so, that Pilate should not press it till he obtained an answer. One of these wonders is the cause of the other, and if you consider them in connection, your astonishment will cease. The levity of the querist was the cause of the silence of the oracle. Truth in awful majesty, though veiled and insulted, stood before him, and indignantly refused to unfold its secrets and its glories to one who discovered such frivolity on such a subject. It was the question on his lips of idle curiosity, not of deep solicitude; which came from the surface, and not from the lowest depths of the heart. If Christ had gratified Pilate’s curiosity, well j

PERPLEXITY OF RELTGIOrS CONTROVERSY. 125

but he did not think truth of sufficient importance to inquire after it a second time.

The conduct of Pilate to Jesus and of Jesus to Pilate is repeated every day. Multitudes, by a little attention to religion and their Bibles, ak, “What is truth .?” but it is in such a careless and undevout manner, that Jesus Christ leaves them to wander in their own dark and miserable conjectures. Hence so many prejudices; hence so many erronous opinions of religion; hence so many dangerous delusions, in what is called the Christian world.

Still there have been very many who in sober and solemn inquisitiveness have asked the question, “What is truth?” Myriads of human intellects of the highest order have engaged in the pursuit of this great object; and as regards scientific knowledge, have by demonstration and experi* ment echoed in unison, and with something of the rapture with which it was originally uttered, the Eureka of Archimedes. But in reference to moral and religious truth, how multitudinous, and how contradictory are the voices which answer the inquiry! If we may judge from the present state and aspect of Christendom, the day is far distant when the response to the question shall come forth in a grand univocal reply, “This is truth.” Hence the perplexities of many young persons at the outset of their religious life.

Many things, young men, will perplex you at the outset of a religious life, and tend in the early stages of your inquiry into this momentous subject, to embarrass you. The mysterious nature of the whole subject of religion, so far as it relates to divine, heavenly, and eternal truths; the general neo’lect of the subject in any earnest manner by the multitude around you; and the lukewarmness and inconsistency of many of those who make a profession of it; will all be apt to produce an unfavorable impression upon your mind, to shake your resolutions, and render your steps hesitating and faltering. There is also another cause of perplexity, which is the subject of this evening’s discourse; I mean the number of religious sects, the diversity of creeds, and the ceaseless and yet unsettled controversies which prevail throughout all Christendom. Amidst such diversity, you are bewildered; and amidst such contentions, distracted, and ready to abandon the subject in hopeless despair of arriving at the truth.

I sympathize with you, my young friends, in your difficulties, and have met you this evening with a discourse which is intended, by God’s blessing, to extricate, relieve, and guide you; and which if it do not remove — for what can remove the difficulty — may do something to lessen it.

First. — I will state particularly what if is that perplexes you. I descend into the depths of your secret thoughts, and I find there some surprise that on such a subject as roligion, especially with a revelation from God, there should be any controversy, or any room for controversy at all. You may be ready to suppose that all would be so plain as to preclude the possibility of diversity, controversy, or mistake. But, do men think alike on any other subject? Is there consentaneousness of opinion on any one topic that is sustained only by moral evidence? Was there, for instance, ever a statute of law passed, which is usually so framed as to exclude if possible all diflperences of opinion, about which lawyers might not as to some of its clauses raise doubts and difficulties, and express differences of opinion .? Is not a written revelation from God, inasmuch as it relates to subjects foreign from our ordinary matters, remote from our senses, and out of the usual track of our thoughts, just that one thing about which beyond all others, diversity of opinion might be expected ’

PERPLEXITY OF RELIGIOtS CONTROVERSY. 127

Consider the thousands of propositions contained in the Bible; consider the ambiguities of language; the mysteriousness of the subjects; the endlessly diversified temperament of the human mind and circumstances in which that mind is placed; and you will see at once that nothing short of an astounding and constant miracle could produce absolute uniformity of opinion. Nor is this all; for such is the corruption of the human mind, that it is not only on this ground likely to go wrong in its judgments, but it is actually opposed with very strong dislike to many of the truths revealed, and which on that account it really wishes and attempts to pervert, as being too humbling for its pride, too pure for its depravity, and too authoritative for its love of independence. Here, again, we see reason to abate our surprise at this diversity of opinion.

2. The young inquirer about religion is not unfrequently scandalized and disgusted, by the bitterness of sectarianism, and the rancor with which controversy is conducted. He sees the evil passions of our corrupt nature, “malice, wrath, and all uncharitableness,” as rife in the writings, and therefore in the hearts, of religious polemics, as they are in those of the fiercest political antagonists; and he says in thoughtful seriousness, ‘’ Was not Christianity sent to produce peace on earth, and good will to men 1 Is it not said that love is its gardinal excellence? Can these men, any of them, really believe in the Christian religion, which places charity at the top of the Christian virtues r” We say to you without hesitation, all this bitterness is wrong, cannot be justified, and is condemned by the volume about which they contend. To speak the truth in love is one of its own injunctions. But recollect that even the best of men are imperfect, and that nothing so strongly appeals to oui imperfections, and brings them into such activity, as contradiction and controversy. It is not true to say there is more bitterness in theological controversy, than in any other kind — but it is true that there ought to be less. One thing should not be forgotten, that the importance of the subject naturally renders men more earnest than any other, and that earnestness, it must be admitted, too generally degenerates into unseemly violence and bitterness. There is in every human heart, however morally excellent and holy, some corruption lying underneath its excellencies, which by controversy is too often brought to the surface, just as the sediment at the bottom of clear water, is stirred up by the agitation of the vessel.

3. The equal mental power with which opposing systems are maintained, is to a mind unskilled in dialectics, and unable to detect the fallacies which lurk, and the sophistries which abound, in erroneous ratiocination, often very trying. It is admitted, for it is impossible to question it, that great ability is. possessed and displayed by all parties, by the combatants for error as well as for truth, in the arena of religious strife. And who can wonder, since the Father of lies has perhaps the most wonderful intellect in the universe, next to God and Christ. In contending armies upon the field of battle, equal courage, skill, and prowess, are often displayed for a long time by both sides, the wrong as well as the right; and a spectator of the awful conflict might be at a loss to determine whfch would gain the victory, and which ought to gain it. There is no error so palpable even to common sense, but what may be defended with arguments so ingenious as to defy ordinary minds in the attempt to detect their fallacies and expose their sophistries. Truth is often with the weaker party; I mean weaker in the use of dialectic weapons.

A skilful polemic may often make error appear more plausible than truth.

4. The apparent equality of moral excellencies in the advocates of opposing systems of opinions, is sometimes perplexing; and in some cases, even a superior amiableness may seem to be with those who advocate error, as we consider it, to those who contend for truth. It must not be forgotten that religious truth is intended to produce two results, love to God and love to man. In other words, morality and piety. Remember this, and it is of vast importance you should remember it. Penitence, faith, inward holiness, devoutaess, heavenliness, are all parts of religion, without which the fairest morality, and most beautiful amiableness, are in the sight of God, nothing worth; and will be found totally unavailing to salvation. There may be much general amiableness without an atom of genuine piety. The only true standard of moral excellence is the Bible, and that places God before us as the first object of regard. Systems as well as men are to be judged of by their fruits; but then we must always ask what kind of fruits they are designed to produce. Bible truths must produce Bible fruits, and these are something more than the moralities, amiabilities, and courtesies of life, valuable, and necessary, and important as these are.

5. The present unsettled state of controversy finishes the perplexity. It would seem as if we were no nearer the adjustment of our differences than ever. The sects are as numerous, the creeds are as various and as diverse, and the contests as eager as ever, after all the ratiocination which has been employed, and the volumes which have been written through so many ages. But surely this should not Skdd. much to your difficulty, for if diversity of opinion exist at any time, it may be expected to exist at all times. Men’s minds are constituted alike in all ages, and may be expected to diiTer in all ages. That under the greater prevalence of a more earnest piety, and the establishment of sounder canons of criticism and interpretation, aided by the dispensations of Providence, and a more copious effusion of the Holy Spirit,

greater approximation of sects and opinions will take place, may no doubt be expected; and for that state of things all should devoutly pray and hope.

In looking at this prevalence of diversified opinion, and seemingly endless coutroversy, let us inquire if while admitting it to be an evil, we may not discover some good, which by the ordering of Providence will not be and even now is brought out from it:

Does not this diversity of sects, and sharpness of controversy, effectually tend to preserve the purity of the sacred text of the Bible? Suppose there were in some large town one public reservoir, from which all the inhabitants drew their supplies of water; and suppose further, there were some considerable diversity of opinion as to the real quality and properties of the water, which all, however, considered to be necessary; would they not all watch each other that no liberty whatever was taken with the common source, to corrupt it by infusing into it anything which would make it more agreeable to their views and tastes, or to diminish the supply, or indeed to take any other freedom with this common benefit? They may sometimes dispute, and very sharply too, about the quality of the water, and some bad feeling might be generated in the course of their disputes, but still their natural jealousies would make them jointly protectors of the reservoir, and guardians of its purity and preservation. Something like this occurs in the diversities of sects; they have the Bible common to them all, and on which they all profess to be founded. They differ in opinion as to its contents, but then this very difference makes them keep a sharp look-out upon each other, to see that none of them corrupt the text, either by way of interpolation, emendation, or excision. Such attempts indeed in earlier ages have been made, but they have been detected and exposed. Copies multipled by millions, in various languages, and held in the hands of various churches and denominations prevent this now. The existence of sects and controversies guarantees to us a pure and uncorrupted Bible

Then does it not tend to make the Bible more examined and thoroughly searched? How little is this book explored in Popish countries, where differences of opinion are repressed and controversy forbidden! How much more gold is brought up in California, where any one may dig and explore for himself, than in those places where the mines are a royal monopoly, and none may dig but by authority! What additions are made to the stock of our scriptuial knowledge, where the stern voice of the Church forbids the exercise and right of private judgment, the publication of individual opinion, and the existence and maintenance of controversy. Even if error by this means could be shut out, how much of truth is excluded with it.’* How little as compared with Protestant writers have Roman Catholics added to our stores of Biblical knowledge?

Has not God overruled the zeal of party for the spread of his cause? Do not the sects quicken each other’s zeal by the power of rivalry y Is not this the case both at home and abroad? I acknowledge that in this zeal there is an infusion of sectarianism, and so far it is a corruption, but there is nothing absolutely pure in our world, and this very infusion

132 THE YOLNG MAn’s FRIEND.

may stimulate the efforts of the zealot. A propagator of Methodism; or Church of Englandism; or Presbjterianism; or Baptism; or Independency; may be stimulated in his efforts to spread his particular opinions, by some sectarianism; but still with these he carries something more, and something better, for he carries with him the gospel of salvation. I have no doubt that sectarianism does add something to our zeal even in our Home and Foreign Missions, and so far may seem to corrupt it; but on the other hand it prevents us from sinking into a state of inertness and stagnancy. The Roman Church tells us she can do this without the rivalry of sects. This is not quite true. It is this very rivalry which has in part enabled her to gain her wide extent and dominion. Witness her various orders, and especially that of the Jusuits, and the controversy between the Jesuits and the Jansenists — between her various orders of monks — and her Gallican and Ultramontane opinions.

The existence of this diversity gives occasion also — alas that so few should be forward to avail themselves of it, — for manifesting our forbearance towards each other and bringing into exercise that “charity which is the bond of perfectness.” It would be diflScult to say which would be the most beautiful spectacle, a church uniform in opinion, or somewhat multiform in sentiment, yet maintaining a unity of spirit in the bond of peace.

We thus see that some good may be brought out of the evil of controversy and the prevalence of sectarianism. The entrance of moral evil into God’s wise, benevolent, and holy administration, seemed to he evil, and only evil; yet how has God overruled it for a brighter and completer manifestation of his character.

Secondly. I shall now advert to the wronor methoda

PERPLEXITY OF RELIGIOUS CONTRl VERSY. 133

which some adopt to relieve themselves of the perplexity occasioned by this diversity. In some cases it may lead, or tend to lead, either to general scepticism, or to a total abandonment of all religion, under a despair of ever finding out the truth. Men are apt to say,” We will give it all up, for who amidst such endless diversity can hope to find the truth? But is this rational? Do men act thus in other matters about which much diversity prevails? Do they give up politics because of the numerous parties into which on that controverted subject men are divided? Do they abandon the subject of finance, political economy, and metaphysics, on this ground? And why should they do it in religion? How many have found out what they conceive to be the truth, and are reposing in peace upon their convictions? And why may not you? Abjure then the idea of abandoning religion on this ground. You will find this to be no excuse at the day of judgment. God has given you an intellect capable of investigating the subject and will hold you responsible for the exercise of it in this particular. Men are divided in opinion upon food and medicine; upon the best means of promoting health; and will you therefore give up all care about the best way to maintain your life, health, and comfort y Truth is to be found somewhere, and it is an indolent disposition which leads us to give up the pursuit, because we do not by a kind of intuition, or at any rate, a hasty first view of the subject, know what it is, and where it is to be found. You must search after it. Your salvation depends upon your finding and embracing those truths with which it is connected. Multitudes have found it, and so may you.

Some few persons, unable to decide upon the truth as regards doctrines have contented themselves with observing as they suppose, the ‘practical parts of religion, and have relinquished all care about what they call dogmas. They have attempted to construct a religion which is irrespective of the peculiarities of sect or creed; and which shall consist wholly of moral duties, with perhaps a few exercises of general devotion. This is deism. It is true they thus get rid of controversy, but at the same time they get rid of Christianity also. The Scriptures are set aside entirely, and all the great facts and truths of revelation are entirely repudiated. The Bible is not merely a code of morals to be obeyed and practised, but a declaration of facts and truths to be believed. Scripture ethics rest on Scripture doctrines. Faith and not merely practice is the demand of revelation. But the great and effectual relief from the perplexities of controversy is supplied, it is alleged, by Popery. The Church of Rome professes that it is itself, by its doctrine and discipline, as set forth in its councils, canons, and creeds, a living perpetual tribunal, to decide all matters of religious faith and practice, and thus to prevent all controversy. All doctrines are settled and determined for its members by the church, as the authoritative and infallible expounder of the truth. This is the lure it holds forth to those who are without its pale; who are perplexed with controversy, and distracted by religious strifes, and the multitudes of religious sects — “Come with us, we are the true church, possessing authority and infallibility to decide upon doctrine, which is thus ready provided for all its members, without the labor of inquiry, the pain of suspense, the disquietude of doubt, or the peril of mistake. Receive the faith of the church, and believe as the church believes; which guarantees your safety in all that you receive with this implicit faith. You will thus be taken out of the divisions, distractions, and controversies of Protestantism, and find rest for your weary sciul in the lap and on the bosom of your Holy Mother, the Church.”

This is somewhat attractive it must be confessed, and if it were true would be quite satisfactory; but it is awfully deceptive. Where in the Scripture is any church invested with the authority to be a living umpire, and to decide all controversies y Where is there any allusion to such a tribunal y Is it not to the Scripture, and not to the church, we are every where directed for settling the question, “What is truth .?”

Even if the church were this living tribunal, we contend that the Papacy so far from being the true church, is an awful apostacy, and repugnant to every part of the New Testament. Instead of being the judge of truth, it is a false witness, whose testimony is a compound of the most palpable falsehoods, and soul-destroying errors; whose continued voice speaketh lies in hypocrisy. The claim of the Church of Rome to infallibility, which is the basis of the living tribunal, is repugnant alike to reason, to Scripture, and to the facts of her own history. It acknowledges that infallibility is not the attribute of its individual members, but only of the collective body, assembled in a General Council. But is it not an universal law of logic, that what is in the genus must be in the species y If, therefore, the collective body is infallible, so must be its individual members. How can a collection of fallibles, multiply them as you will, make up an infallible? Besides, the Church of Rome is not yet decided, and never has been, where this infallibility resides; whether in the Pope without a General Council — - a General Council without a Pope — or a Pope and a General Council. Thus the claim is repugnant to reason. It is equally so to Scripture, which in a thousand places admits

136 THK TOITXG man’s friend.

the liability of all men to err; except such as are under a Divine inspiration. Nor is the claim less contradictory to the history of Romanism, which declares that Pope has been against Pope; the same Pope against himself; and Council against Council. There is scarcely a doctrine of Popery which has not been the subject of controversy within the bosom of the Papal community. The variations of Popery have been almost as numerous as those of Protestantism. Where then is its infallibility?

The claim of the Church of Rome to be this living tribunal, which is to settle once for all and for every body what is truth, and to prevent all controversy by forbidding the exercise of private judgment, is in direct contradiction to the Word of God, which calls upon every man for himself to “search the Scriptures,” “to prove all things,” and “hold* fast that which is good.”

To constitute the church the tribunal which is to decide for us what is truth, without our examination of the Scriptures for ourselves, is to make all its members believers in the church rather than in the Word of God, and thus to put the church in the place of the Bible as the object of faith.

This method of deciding controversies, and settling the question what is truth, renders the Scriptures all but useless for the people; and therefore is very consistent with the prohibited indiscriminate use of the Scriptures by them.

This scheme is an utter degradation of man’s nature as a rational being, and is a plan never adopted in reference to any thing else. Who would endure such a method of determining questions of literature, science, politics, law, or art? Why, therefore, should man’s own inquiry be debarred on the most momentous of all topics, and he be exposed to the consequences of eternal ruin by implicitly trusting to the judgments of others?

How is any man to know whether he really believes what the church believes, and all it believes? Who can search the numberless folios which contain the faith of the church, and be satisfied that he has not omitted something which the church requires of him? And though creeds drawn up by Popes, and catechisms and manuals by learned doctors and eminent bishops, may be put into the hands of the people, yet as no individual man, however elevated, even the Pope himself, is infallible, how is any one to be satisfied that there is no error in these compositions? Besides, as no one can have access to the church except as it is represented to him by some individual priest, who is in the place of both God and the church to him; how can any one be sure, since that individual priest is fallible, but that he may err in the views he may give of the church’s doctrine?

This living tribunal by suppressing controversy destroys liberty, and turns the whole subject of religion into a matter of slavish submission to human authority. And with liberty, piety also to a considerable extent expires. The dull uniformity produced by the compulsion of authority, would be no compensation for the loss of that activity and spirit which are kept alive by the neighborhood and zeal of rival sects.” The Gallican Church no doubt looked upon it as a signal triumph when she prevailed upon Louis XIV. to repeal the Edict of Nantes, which by refusing toleration to the Huo-uenots, suppressed the voice of controversy and the existence of sects. But what was the consequence y Where shall we look after this period, for her Fenelons and her Pascals y Where for the distinguished monuments of piety and learning, which were the glory of her better days y xls for piety,

]38 TnE YOUNG man’s friend.

she perceived she had no occasion for it, when there >-d3 no lustre of Christian holiness surrounding her; nor for learning, when she had no longer any enemies to confute, or any controversies to maintain. She felt herself at liberty to become as ignorant, as secular, as irreligious as she pleased; and amidst the silence and darkness she had created around her, she drew the curtains and retired to rest. The accession of numbers she gained by suppressing her opponents, was like the small extension of length a body acquires by death; the feeble remains of life were extinguished, and she lay a putrid corpse, a public nuisance, filling the air with pestilential exhalations.”*

Such then are the objections to a living and infallible tribunal for the decision of controversy, as claimed by the Church of Rome.

But, perhaps, it will be asked whether all denominations do not put forth creeds, articles, and catechisms, which they not only teach, but the belief of which is required by their members. Certainly, as acknowledged symbols of their views of the Word of God; but these they allow every man to test by the Scriptures, and to reject them if he sees fit. They are held forth to guide, but not to compel. They are proposed but not imposed. They are submitted for examination and instruction to the judgment, but they are not made to bind the conscience.

You see then, young men, that the perplexities of controversy must not be avoided by surrendering up your judgment into the hands of priests; but you are to employ it diligently for yourselves in coming to a conclusion upon the various questions which divide and agitate the religious world.

Thirdly. The question, however, comes back — What
* Robert Hall on “Zeal without Innovation.”

is to be done? How is the mind to be relieved from its perplexity in listening to the contradictory views which reply to the question, What is truth? Is an inquirer to set about to read and study the religious opinions of all the denominations in existence? That would be an endless and needless labor. It would be a useless consumption of time, and would only end in still deeper and more painful perplexity. Take the case of any other book than the Bible, — a legal statute, or a history, or any other document, about which a great diversity of interpretation existed, and which was in your own hands, would you in order to know its true meaning think it necessary to read all these clashing opinions? No! You would say, “I will read and study the document itself. I have it in my possession in the vernacular tongue, and I will read and judge for myself.” Act thus in reference to the Bible and religious differences.

1. Study the Scriptures. Search the Word of God for yourselves. Be intimately acquainted with your Bibles, especially the New Testament. But there is a right and a wrong way of doing this. The exhortation to search the Scriptures is expressive of a particular state of mind, as well as of an outward duty. Carry no preconceived nations to the Bible., with which it is your previous determination to make everything square. Read the Word of God with a simple and sincere desire to know its real meaning. In reading the Scriptures there must be no attempt to try what, by the aid of a perverted ingenuity and a previous bias, they may be made to say; but a simple desire to know what they do say. Read with entire and absolute impartiality, just as you would the prescription of a physician who had given you directions for food and medicine,- to restore and preserve your health. Let there be a humble and teachable disposition. ‘’ Receive with meekness the ingrafted word.” “The meek will h« guide in judgment, the meek will he shew his way.” “Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of God.” And whatever exercise of our intellect may be carried on, and however convinced we may be that the intellect must be exercised, there should be associated with this a humble and wholesome distrust of our own understanding. In searching the Scriptures we must consider their design as well as their meaning; that they are intended not only to communicate knowledge, but faith and holiness. The Bible is a book to make us wise unto salvation. It contains a “doctrine according to godliness.” “Sanctify them through thy truth,” was the prayer of Christ for his disciples. Divine truth is intended to produce a divine life. To read in order to know, or to support and defend a system, is a low and unworthy end. To search the Scriptures aright, yoti, must give up and abstain from all sinful indulgencies. “Laying aside all filthiness, and superfluity of naughtiness, receive with meekness the engrafted word,” is the injunction of the apostle. The lusts of the mind, — the pride of intellect, the love of wealth, thirst after human applause, as well as the lusts of the flesh, impair the mental vision, and smite the soul with spiritual blindness, insomuch, that holy truth, however plain, remains undiscovered.

There is another disposition to be carried to the Scriptures in our perusal of them, and that on account of its importance, I place by itself, that it might be very conspicuously seen as seriously considered, and as vividly and practically remembered; I mean that suggested by our Lord, where he says,” If any man will do his (G-od’s)’will, he shall know of the doctrine (which I speak) whether it be of God, or

PERPLEXITf OF RELIGIOUS CONTROVERSY. 141

whether I speak of myself.” John vii. 17. A real obedience to the will of God, as far as we at present know it, united with a sincere and hearty determination to do it in all further discoveries of it, to whatever risks, sacrifices, and inconveniences such obedience may expose us, is the best way of coming to a right knowledge of the truth. We must love truth not only for its own sake, but for its holy tendency and effect: and he that is most anxious to obtain holiness by truth, is most likely to know truth for the sake of holiness. Right dispositions are the way to obtain right opinions. Divine truth, unlike scientific knowledge, is intended, as well as adapted to produce moral results, and if we are not anxious to obtain these, we are not likely to come to a knowledge of the truths themselves.

There must also be very earnest ‘prayer for the teaching of the Holy Spirit. There are undoubtedly some things in the Bible hard to be understood; but in what pertains to salvation, all is as clear as crystal. But if there be light in the Bible, there is darkness in us. “The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God for they are foolishness unto him J neither can he know them because they are spiritually discerned.’’^ 1 Cor. ii. 14. The safe and proper, and only safe and proper manner of approaching the heavenly oracle, is that which David manifested, when he thus prayed, “Open thou mine eyes that I might behold wondrous things out of thy law.” So, also the Apostle entreated for the Colossians, “We do not cease to pray for you, and to desire that ye might be filled with the knowledge of his will in all wisdom and spiritual understanding,” chap. i. 9. It might not strike some, that although we have the book, it is necessary in addition to have the teaching of the Author: but it it were not absolutely necessary, yet surely this would bo considered a privilege, even as regards a human production. But it is in this case necessary. How powerful is the influence of our inward corruption in blinding and bewildering our judgments! How liable are we to err! How momentous a matter is it on which to mistake! How numerous and how fatal are the mistakes that are made! Unless therefore, we not only pray, but give ourselves to prayer for divine illumination, we are likely, even with the Bible in our hands to go wrong. That the Bible may be mistaken, and z-5, no one can doubt. The subject of this sermon proves it. How many errors are in the world on the subject of divine revelation.

2. As your safest guide amidst the diversities of religious opinion which exist, and as the best mode of relieving your mind from the perplexity occasioned by controversy, acquire the elements of decided personal godliness. These lie within a very narrow compass, are common to many denominations of professing Christians, and with whatever other sentiments they may be associated, will obtain the possession of eternal life. Be sure to be right on great and fundamental points. Be upon the foundation, and then though you are a little off the perpendicular, yet you will not fall. And what are these grand essentials, without which no man can be saved, and with which every man will be saved, whatever in other respects may be his creed or his church? Repentance towards God, — faith in our Lord Jesus Christ — and evangelical holiness. I do not mean to say that these constitute all that God has revealed and therefore all that we need concern ourselves about. By no means. There are innumerable other matters which are found in the Word of God, but these are the substance — the great essentials to salvation. Personal godliness is the great preservative from serious error. As in the animal economy there are certain instincts which lead the irrational creatures to select good and salubrious food, and to refuse and repel such substances as are noxious, so in the spiritual economy there is something analagous. There are certain sentiments and systems which it is scarcely necessary to prove to the spiritual mind that they are false, for the spiritual taste pronounces them to be bad. The holy life within refuses and repels them at once as repugnant to its nature; and the stronger and healthier that life is, the greater is the force of this repugnance. Hence the necessity, not only of our being possessed of true personal godliness, but of high degrees of it. He who feels all the vitalising power of sound doctrine in making him holy, heavenly, and happy, will be in some danger of mischief from other doctrines, and feel little necessity to inquire into other sentiments. The man who finds his strength firm, his health glowing, his spirits buoyant, his employment easy, by means of good, plain, nutritious food, will have no need to study the various systems of medicine and dietetics. He may let physicians wrangle on, without troubling himself about their conflicting opinions. So the man strong in faith, lively in hope, and ardent in the love of God and man: he who has joy and peace in believing: he who is able to mortify his corruptions, and invigorate his graces, by those views of divine truth, which he has gained, need not read through a book of religious denominations to find out what is truth, for he has “the witness in himself.” 3. It would be of material service, and a great help to you in deciding for yourself in matters of controversy as to what is truth, to gather from the Scripture, by a devout and careful perusal, some hroad comprehensive views of its general purport and design, in reference to doctrine ceremony, and government. Broad and general views on any subject greatly assist us in understanding its minuter parts and details.

As regards what is usually called doctrines the Scriptures every where assert the lapsed, the corrupt, and condemned state of human nature; in other words, that man is a guilty and unholy creature, who has fallen from his original state of righteousness, and who if recovered from this condition and restored to the favor of God, must be saved by some aid from without: that the design of the incarnation and death of our Lord Jesus Christ is to effect man’s redemption from sin, guilt, or death, in a manner harmonious with the perfections. of the divine character, and the principles of God’s moral government; that the blessings consequent to man upon this system of mediation, are pardon, peace and holiness here, and eternal life hereafter: and that the conditions on which, as a siTie qua noUj and not as a meritorious cause, these blessings are bestowed — are repentance towards God, and faith in our Lord Jesus Christ — in short, the union of the salvation of sinners, and of the manifested glory of God’s moral character. Now this, one should think, must be conceded by every one who has obtained the least acquaintance with the Word of God. What a guide would these views prove to the settlement of many controversies! Through what labyrinths of opinion would these first principles of the Christian scheme lead you in safety! How many details would they include, and how many connected doctrines unfold, and establish, or render necessary! Let these then be deeply rooted in your mind as so many fundamental truths, and be made to bear on all the controversies of which you may hear or read. Bring all other sentiments to the ordeal of this question, ‘Do they profess or deny the

FERPLEXirY OF RELIGIOUS CONTROVERSY. 115

corruption of human nature so clearly laid down in the Word of Grod, and its recovery from guilt and depravity by a system of mediation through Christ, which unites the redemption of man and the manifested glory of God?”

A similar general reference to the ceremonial of the New Testament will help you to settle many controversies on this subject. You cannot possibly read the Gospels and Epistles without observing the contrast presented in one striking point 6f view, between Judaism and Christianity — the former exhibiting so much that was ceremonial, the latter so little: the one being eminently a ritual system, the other no less eminently a spiritual one. When Christ suffered on Calvary, and expired with that triumphant* shout “It is FINISHED,” he changed the whole aspect of revealed religion. On one side of the cross you behold the Law, with its priests, its sacrifices, and its rites, retiring from sight; on the other, you behold the Gospel, with its simple and spiritual institutions, coming forward into view. From that hour the great design of Christianity was to form a character, of which a new, divine, and inward life should be the animating soul, and holiness in all its branches and beauties, be the external manifestation. Christianity was intended, if not to put an end to ritualism, yet so to subordinate it to spiritualism, conscientiousness, and holy love, that it should be but as the fillet round the brow, or the bracelet on the arm of piety. Christianity has left us nothing but baptism and the Lord’s supper in the form of ceremony, and has said so little even about these as to lead us to suppose it considers them of very inferior importance to what is moral and spiritual. Just ask the question again, “What kind of religion does the New Testament chiefly design to teach, a rituaf or a spiritual one .?” Here again you will be furnished with a test of many a system. Connected with ceremony is priesthood. Observe what is said in the New Testament about this. How very little is said about religious officials or functionaries of any kind, compared with what is said of other things. Christ is our Great High Priest, and all real Christians are the priesthood. No other priest is mentioned. And as to bishops, pastors, or elders, their only functions mentioned are teaching and ruling. A sacerdotal order, or sacerdotal acts, are nowhere referred to. It nowhere seems the design of the apostles to make much of man, and to invest him with domination or ghostly authority in the church. Even they disclaimed being lords of Grod’s heritage.

So again with regard to ecclesiastical -polity it will be well to take a general view of this question, as furnished by the New Testament. I say the New Testament, for the Old was the code of law for Judaism, as this is for Christianity. It would be no more proper to look to the constitution of the Jewish Theocracy for the model of the Christian church, than it would be to the temple, its priests, and sacrifices, and ceremonies, for the regulations of Christian worship. The same difference is observable in the ecclesiastical character of Judaism and Christianity as is evident in their ceremonial. The Divine Author of our religion has furnished by his confession before Pilate —” My kingdom is not of this worW — that which is the key to all social religion, and ecclesiastical organization. The elaboration, complexity and secularity of earthly kingdoms do not appertain to His church, of which the characteristics are simplicity and spirituality. The design of church government is not so much the conversion of men’s souls, as the fellowship, edification, and comfort of those who are already converted. The church of Christ

PERPLEXITY OF RELIGIOUS CONTPvOVERSY. 147

consisting of the company of believers, must in all its institutes be adapted to spiritual men, and have respect to their order, harmony, and mutual helpfulness. It has nothing worldly in its nature or design. It is in the world, but not of it. The more spiritual and simple a scheme of ecclesi* astical polity is, the more likely, upon this general principle now laid down, does it seem to be that it is an approximation to that set up by our Lord Jesus Christ. The more clearly it exhibits the church as a separate community, like the Jews amidst surrounding nations, dwelling apart by itself, governed by its own laws, animated by its own spirit, and pursuing its own objects, the more does it accord with all which the New Testament teaches us on this subject.

An attention to these general aspects of divine revelation will greatly assist us in coming to a conclusion upon most points of religious controversy.

4. Having made up your minds, upon evidence, as to what is truth, then have as little to do with religious controversy as you can. Seek a practical rather than a polemical religion. Treat it rather as something to be done than talked about. Be not fond of disputation. Be no religious knight-errant, running a tilt against every one who differs from you. A pugnacious disposition, whether it be from a natural combativeness or a prevailing vanity, is a dangerous thing to piety, which, like the dew, falls only in a still atmosphere, and lies longest in the shade. Be too much taken up with adding “to your faith virtue, and to virtue knowledge, and to knowledge temperance, and to temperance patience, and to patience godliness, and to godliness brotherly kindness, and to brotherly kindness charity,” to have much time fo’r strife and contention.

Let it be your great concern to eat of the Bread of Life, pure and unadulterated, rather than mix up with it the grit and thorns of controversy; and to drink, and not trouble and foul, the clear Water of Life. Avoid a taste for curiosity in things unrevealed — a speculative turn concerning things mysterious — and a distempered zeal for what, if true, is comparatively little. “There is,” says an old author, ‘^ a kind of intemperance in most of us, a wild and irregular desire to make things more or less than they are in themselves, and to remove them well nigh out of sight by our additions and defalcations. Few there are who can be content with truth, and settle and rest in it as it appeareth in that nakedness and simplicity in which it was first brought forth; but men are ever drawing out conclusions of their own, spinning out and weaving speculations, thin, unsuitable, and unfit to be worn, which yet they glory in and defend with more heat and animosity than they do that truth which is necessary and by itself sufficient without this art. For these are creatures of our own, shaped out in our phantasie, and so drest up by us with all accurateness and curiosity of diligence, that we fall at last in love with them, and apply ourselves to them with that closeness and adherency which dulleth and taketh oif the edge of our affection to that which is most necessary, and so Icaveth that neglected and last in our thoughts, which is main. As we read of the painter who having stretched his phansie and spent the force of hig imagination in drawing Neptune to the life, could not raise his after thoughts to the setting forth the majesty of Jupiter.”

Love the closet of devotion more than the arena of contention; study the Bible more than the volume of angry discussion; and seek the company of the sons of peace, vather than association with those who say” we are for

TERFLEXITY OF RELIGIOUS CONTROVERSY. 1 i’J

ar.” It is well of course, to make yourselves acquainted j/enerally with the subjects of controversy, especially of the leading controversies of the day. No young man, for instance, should be ignorant of the great principles of Evangelical truth as opposed to Rationalism or Unitarianism; or of Protestantism and Popery; in all their range and bearing: it is the question of the day, and in order to contend earnestly for “the faith once delivered to the saints,’’ we mubt know what the faith is, and both how it is assailed and how it can be defended. Every man should know what he believes and why he believes it; and thus “be able to give a reason with meekness and fear of the hope that is in him.” He should take his side and valiantly keep it. All this is proper and necessary, but this is a different thing to our reducing religion to a mere matter of controversy. How many are there whose whole godliness is a mere contest for a creed, or a church, without their having any true faith in Christ, or their being members of the church which he hath purchased with his blood. What multitudes are now fierce for Protestantism, who have never embraced one great true Protestant principle with their whole heart! Oh that men were but more anxious to practice Christianity than controvert about it. That they were as zealous for holiness as they seem to be for truth, and to imbibe the spirit and exhibit the image of Christ in their temper, character, and conduct, as they are to embody his doctrines in their creeds. Young men, be ardent lovers of the truth, diligent seekers after it, constant associates with it, and impassioned admirers, valiant defenders, and zealous promoters of it; but at the same time, not pugnacious, restless, bitter, and bigoted disputants for it.

5. Having received upon satisfactory evidence the system of doctrine which you believe to be Scriptural, do not allow your convictions to be shaken, or your faith to be staggered, on account of any difl&culties with which it may seem to be attended; nor by any cavils and objections brought against it, which you may not be able to answer.

It is of great importance for you to remember that there is no truth, however evident and certain it may be, against which an ingenious and dexterous sophist may not advance some plausible objections, and in connexion with which, its most assured believers may not see some difficulties they may not be able to explain. Mathematical science is the only department of human inquiry which excludes all doubt and difficulty. Even the experimental philosopher sometimes finds many difficulties in his path which he is unable to clear up; some ultimate laws which perplex and confound him: yet there, established by many and well-ascertained proofs, is the baffling fact. What course does the philosopher now take? Does he disbelieve his experiments, discredit the testimony of his senses, reject the evidence which has come before him, and abandon himself to scepticism? Certainly not. He credits his proofs, he relies upon his ascertained facts, and says, “I am puzzled, I see a difficulty which I cannot yet explain, but I hold fast my conviction of the truth of what I have proved, and wait for further light to clear up what is now dark. I cannot forsake and give up evidence, because of some yet unexplored difficulty, and thus relinquish what I do know for what I do not know.” Is not this perfectly rational? Entirely philosophical? In this way I am anxious you should act in reference to religion, its doctrines, and its controversies. Receive whatever truth revelation makes known, and because it makes it known, no matter with what difficulty it may be attended, and wait foi further light to enlighten what is now dark. By difficulty, I mean something you cannot perfectly understand: something you cannot entirely harmonize with your own notions; something you cannot make quite to agree with some other portions of divine truth; something which may be objected to by others, whose objections you feel yourselves in some measure unable to answer. If the evidence convinces you, let not the difficulty confound you, or shake your convictions. It may be well sometimes, when startled and perplexed with difficulty on one side of a question, to look at the difficulties on the other side. Suppose you reject a doctrine, or a system, because of something you cannot explain, would .you not encounter difficulties far more formidable in the opposite system y Have you not more evidence and less difficulty on the side you have taken, than you would find if you were to pass over to the other side y There is a one-sided way of looking at these matters which is carried on by some people, which you should avoid. In very many cases, conviction must rest upon this balance of evidence and difficulty. Each side has both some apparent proof and some objection, and our business is to determine which has most of the former, and less of the latter. I cannot, therefore, give you a more important piece of advice than this, — never abandon evidence to follow difficulty, for it is like turning away from a lantern, somewhat dim it may be, but still a steady light; or from the moon, in a mist perhaps; to run after an ignis fatuus. And at the same time, do not allow yourselves to be driven from your convictions, because you cannot refute all the arguments, or remove all the difficulties, or meet all the objections, which may be brought against “them. There are men, I repeat, of such subtle minds, of such logical power, and so clever in argument, as to maka the worse appear the better cause; who can by fallacy and sophistry sustain the most palpable error, and make that truth appear doubtful which has to you the luminousness of the sun. Never be ashamed to say to such an opponent, ^’ I cannot refute your arguments, nor meet your objections, but I am unmoved by them.” And here I

would reiterate the advice I have already given, — Avoid controversy. Having found what you believe to be truth — believe it — love it — enjoy it — practise it — but do not be eager to dispute about it.

6. Whatever may be your convictions of the truth of the religious opinions you have embraced, cultivate with a love of truth, a spirit of charity. There is a medium which it should be your anxiety to discover between indifference to truth and a distempered zeal for it: between latitudinarianism on the one hand, and bigotry on the other. There are some who make truth every thing in religion, others who make it nothing: the former are the advocates of an unsanctified orthodoxy — the latter of an equally unsanctified charity: the one are the worshippers of a creed — the other, the iconoclasts of all creeds: the former say. No matter how well a man acts, if he does not hold these opinions — the others reply. It is no matter what opinions he holds, provided he acts well. Both are wrong. There can be no right belief of the truth which does not lead to holiness: and there can be no holiness which does not spring from right belief of the truth. Be you, therefore, an advocate for truth, for error is sin. Error cannot sanctify. If a man may disbelieve one truth, and be innocent, he may disbelieve two; if two, ten, if ten, half the Bible; if half the Bible, the whole. Affect no false candor, no spurious charity, as if all sentiments were equally unimportant This is treason against truth, and the God of truth. Let not all the various sects, and denominations, and creeds, appear in your eye only as so many beautiful colors of the rainbow. It is a false and bad figure, and is the very germ of infidelity. But, at the same time, guard against the opposite extreme of a want of charity towards those who differ from you. It is not your business, or mine, to fix that boundary-line of religious opinion which divides those who will be saved from those who will be lost-The Church of Rome, with an insufferable arrogance, and a daring invasion of the prerogative of heaven, has fixed that line in her communion. Imitate not this impious assumption. And while you avoid this highest of all pretensions, of determining who shall or shall not be admitted to the kingdom of heaven, guard against the lesser mischiefs of controversy; I mean that bitterness of spirit, and exclusiveness of feeling, which we are but too apt to cherish towards those who in lesser matters differ from us. Charity is as much a part of truth as doctrine. No man believes the Bible who rejects charity. The want of charity is as truly a heresy as a disbelief in the divinity of Christ. The want of charity will as certainly exclude a man from heaven, as the want of faith. “Now abide faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.” With one hand, lay hoid of faith; with the other, lay hold of charity — then, and then only, may you cherish hope.

And now, Young Men, let me endeavor at any rate, to impress upon you the infinitely, eternally, and therefore ineffably and inconceivably momentous nature of that subject about which all these controversies are carried on. Oh, what uterests and what issues, beyond the compass and the power of any mind, but that which is infinite, to grasp, are comprehended in that one word. Religion ‘. Science, art, lite* rature, politics, law, medicine, all appertain to time, to earth,

to the body; but religion relates to the soul, to heaven, to eternity. What are all the questions which have been asked, the parties that have been formed, the controversies which have been carried on, in reference to the former of these subjects, but matters of a momentary interest and trifles light as air, compared with the latter. Of what importance are all the questions, the sects, the parties, the controversies, of an earthly nature, to “the congregation of the dead,” the inhabitants of the unseen world — the spirits of just men made* perfect — or the lost souls in prison? What will they all be to you a few years hence: what may they be to you next week? But the great controversy about religion has interest in all three worlds — heaven — earth — and hell — and will extend that influence through all eternity. This is a controversy in which you, each one of you, are personally interested. It involves your eternal destiny, and will be a matter of infinite moment to you millions and millions of ages hence. Surely, surely, this consideration, if anything can do it, will throw over your mind an air of deep and solemn seriousness. The levity and the frivolity you carry to other questions; the carelessness and half-heartedness with which you regard other controversies, must be checked here. With a mind looking up into heaven, down into the bottomless pit, and abroad upon eternity, you must ask the question, ‘’ What is truth?” and with a recollection that your torment or your happiness for ever and ever will be influenced by the answer you decide upon amidst all those which are returned from so many quarters. Oh, could yoa enter thus seriously, and anxiously, and prayerfully into the subject, there would be little danger of your ^oing wrong on this momentous topic.

Still you must expect, notwithstanding all your solicitude, to be the subject of some perplexity, as long as you are an inhabitant of this world. Be thankful, however, that what is essential to salvation, is so plain, that he that runs may read. Repent, believe, love, be holy: Is there any mystery ’ here? How many sects agree in this! Of how many creeds is this the essence! How much of the strife of controversy lies outside of this circle! How many minor truths a man may not believe, and yet be saved, if he believe these great fundamentals. How many lesser errors he may have unhappily embraced, and yet not be lost, if he is in no error here! He that keeps his eye upon the pole-star and the greater constellations, will steer his vessel safely, though he may not be intimately acquainted with the stars of lesser magnitude and brilliancy.

To adopt, in conclusion, the directions and words of Saurin: “Buy the truth, which requires the sacrifice of dissipation — of indolence — of precipitancy — of prejudice — of obstinacy — of curiosity — of the passions. We comprise the matter in seven precepts:

“Be attentive.

“Do not be discouraged by labor.

“Suspend your judgment. -r

“Let prejudice yield to reason.

“Be teachable.

“Bcstrain your avidity of knowing.

“In order to edify your mind, subdue your heart.”

But what! Shall we always live in shades and grope in darkness? Will there always be a veil between the porch and the sanctuary y Will God always lead us amidst chasm a and gulphs y Shall we ever dwell near the battle-field of religious controversy, and be within sound of its artillery and the range of its shot? Shall we always hear the confused noise of the warrior, and the cry of defeat mingling with the shouts of victory? Shall we always have to struggle with argument from without, and with doubt and suspense within? 0, no. Presently this night of our ignorance, this dark night, will end, and we shall enter into that blessed world, where there is no need of the sun, because the Lamb is the light thereof. In heaven we shall know all things by a blessed intuition. We shall repose around the fountain of celestial radiance, where neither the sound of controversy, nor the din of arms, will be ever heard. In heaven, wo shall understand all mysteries in nature, providence, grace, and glory. All difficulties will be solved. All objections will be silenced.. How will this perfect light fill us with perfect joy. How delightful will it be to drink knowledge for ever from its divine source, with the perfect assurance, it is pure from any admixture of error. How blissful thus to spend eternity.” This is the revelation of God to us, and there is not in religion a more joyful and triumphant consideration than this perpetual progress which the soul makes in the perfection of its nature, without ever arriving at<in ultimate period. Here truth has the advantage of fable. No fiction, however bold, presents to us a conception so elevating and astonishing as this interminable line of heavenly excellence. To look upon the glorified spirit, as going on from strength to strength; adding virtue to virtue, and knowledge to knowledge; making approaches to goodness which is infinite; for ever adorning the heavens with new beauties, and brightening in the splendors of moral glory, through all the ages of eternity — has something in it

PERrLEXITY OF RELIGIOUS CONTROVERSY. 157

SO transcendaat and ineffable, as to satisfy the most unbounded ambition of an immortal mind.”

Young Men — have you this ambition? If not, take it up from this moment — it is the noblest which God can inspire, or the ^fman bosom receive.