Imagini ale paginilor
PDF
ePub

are to be found in holy Scriptures: or if it does now, it did not always; for it was once much shorter. And creeds never were intended as perfect catalogues of fundamentals, but were compiled with other views and for other purposesh. I may add further, that were the Roman Creed ever so complete a catalogue of fundamentals, when rightly understood, yet since that creed is verbally admitted by all parties and denominations of Christians, and by some that err fundamentally even in point of simple belief, (as by Arians, Socinians, Sabellians, &c. who warp the general expressions of the Creed, as they do Scripture texts also, to their respective persuasions,) the Creed so misinterpreted and misapplied will be of very little service to us, for the distinguishing fundamental articles from non-fundamental. Those learned Divines, who have spoken the most highly of its perfection and use, have always supposed that it ought however to be rightly understood, according to the true meaning and intent of the compilers that drew it up, and of the churches which made use of it: otherwise the design of it is in a great measure lost or frustrated1.

From what hath been observed, we may certainly conclude that the rule which refers us to the Apostles' Creed is a wrong rule, as it is faulty in defect, shortening the number of fundamentals more than is meet at the same time it appears also, in some other respects, to be peccant in excess, taking in some articles which seem not to merit a place among fundamentals. Such for instance are the articles of Christ's suffering under

Ad quæstionem propositam respondemus, non omnes articulos necessarios, si id solum quod expressum est consideres, symbolo contineri. Nihil enim hic est de verbo Dei quod fidei nostræ proximum objectum, norma, et fons est; quodque præterea fundamentum Apostolorum et Prophetarum dicitur, Ephes. ii. 20. Nihil de peccato et miseria nostra, cujus cognitio tamen ut unice necessaria inculcatur, Jerem. iii. 13. Nihil de justificatione per fidem, sine operibus legis, cujus tamen notitiam tanti faciebat Apostolus, ut præ ea, reliqua omnia ut damnum et stercora reputaret, (Phil. iii. 8, 9.) et Christi exsortes esse, et a gratia excidisse declaret, quicunque per legem justificari volunt. Gal. v. 4. Nihil etiam de Dei

adoratione et cultu, et praxi novæ vitæ, quæ exerceri rite non possunt, nisi et cognoscantur, et necessaria esse credantur. Witsius in Symb. Apostol. p. 17.

h See my Sermons, vol. ii. p. 188. Crit. Hist. of the Athanas. Creed, vol. iii. p. 252. Remarks on Clarke's Catechism, vol. iv. p. 39. Importance, vol. iii. p. 536.

i Si qui ex nostris dixerint omnes fundamentales articulos in symbolo contineri, id non eo dixerunt sensu, quasi verborum symboli recitationem mox pro sufficienti Christianismi signo haberent: nam fides nostra non in verbis, sed in sensu sita est, non in superficie sed in medulla, non in sermonum foliis, sed in radice rationis. Witsius ubi supra, p. 17.

Pontius Pilate, and of his descent into hell, whatever it means: for though they are Scriptural truths, theological verities, or articles of religion, yet that they are properly articles of faith, of the essential and fundamental kind, (more than several other Scripture truths left out of the creeds,) does not appeark; neither does their perspicuity, or intrinsic dignity, or use, give them a clear preference above many less noted articles of religion which might be named1.

VI. Some have been of opinion, that the sixth chapter of the Epistle to the Hebrews, in the two first verses, gives us a complete list of fundamentals, under four or five articles, viz. repentance, faith in God, baptism with confirmation, resurrection, and judgment m. But this opinion appears to be founded only in the equivocal sense of the name fundamental, and the want of distinguishing between the elementaries and the essentials of Christianity. The Apostle is there speaking of milk as opposed to strong meat, of doctrines proper to babes in Christ, as opposed to doctrines fit for grown men: he is not speaking of points essential to the Christian system, as opposed to points not essential. The first elements of Christianity are not the same with fundamentals, in the sense we here take the word, as signifying essentials : therefore that passage out of the Hebrews is wide of our present purpose, and mostly foreign to the business in hand. It may indeed be allowed, that the elementary doctrines there specified are so many essentials likewise but there are other essentials

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

:

[blocks in formation]

sons as are in continual expectation " of a resurrection from the dead, and "of eternal judgment: these, I say,

66

66

[ocr errors]

66

[ocr errors]

are plainly the only fundamentals "of Christianity: about these there can be no controversy; in these "there can be no ignorance, no not among persons of the meanest ca66 pacity. And besides these, what"ever other doctrines are occasionally taught, or eagerly disputed about, they cannot be of the foundation of religion, but men may differ concerning them with peace and charity, " and yet every one hold fast the root "of their confidence, the assurance of "their salvation in these undisputed "doctrines of faith and obedience.' Clarke's Posthum. Sermons, vol. ix. serm. iv. p. 90.

[ocr errors]

besides those; neither was it the Apostle's design to number them up in that place. In that short summary of elementary principles, no express mention is made of the doctrine of Christ crucified, which the Apostle elsewhere lays a very particular stress upon"; no mention of justification by the merits and death of Christ, in opposition to justification by mere works, though an essential of the Gospel in St. Paul's account; no express mention of any thing more than what some heretics condemned by St. Paul as such P, and others in like manner condemned by St. John 4, might have owned, or probably did own. Therefore the Apostle's list of elementaries in that place is no list of fundamentals properly so called, no catalogue of essentials. And whereas it is suggested, that those were the only fundamental doctrines stipulated in Baptism, that cannot be true, since it is acknowledged that what concerns the dignity of the person of Christ is omitted in that catalogue': for who can imagine, that Baptism in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, does not carry in it a plain intimation of the dignity of the person of Christ, and a stipulation to pay him the like honour, worship, and service, as we pay to the Father; or that such doctrine and such worship are not essentials in the Christian system? And whereas it is further suggested, that those four or five articles there mentioned by the Apostle are such as admit of no controversy, and that in these there can be no ignorance, no not among persons of the meanest capacity; it may pertinently be replied, that there was great controversy, even in the Apostles' days, about one of them, namely, about the doctrine of the resurrection, which some heretics of that time interpreted to a metaphorical sense, and in effect vacated and frustrated it: and it is notorious at this day, that some Christians, so called, do very ignorantly (for it were hard to say that they do it maliciously) reject water-baptism, and throw off the use or necessity of both Sacraments. So that it is in vain to offer any catalogue of fundamentals which may not or has not been controverted, in whole or in part, by some that call themselves Christians; or to think of settling the rule of fundamentals by considering what may be called the undisputed doctrines of faith and obedience. But this by the way only; we shall have more of that matter presently,

n 1 Cor. ii. 2.

• Gal. i. 7, 8, 9. Gal. v. 4. Phil. iii.

8, 9.

94.

P Gal. i. 7, 8, 9. 1 2 John 10.
Clarke's Sermons, vol. ix. p. 71,

in its proper place. All I shall observe further here is, that if the articles in Hebr. sixth are to be understood in the inclusive way, and with all that they may be supposed to comprehend, or contain, then indeed they may be said to include all the fundamentals, and more; for even the single article of faith towards God, in the reductive way, contains every thing: but if they are to be taken in the exclusive way, (as is plainly intended by those who refer to them as a rule for fixing fundamentals,) then it is certain, that they come vastly short of a complete catalogue. But I proceed.

VII. Some persons observing, that converts in the apostolical times were admitted to Baptism upon the confession of a single article, namely, that Jesus is the Messiah, with two or three concomitant articles, have concluded from thence, that such a general belief is sufficient to make a man a Christian, and therefore also to keep him so: from whence also it is further insinuated, that such a confession gives a man a claim to Christian communion, and that nothing beyond that ought to be absolutely insisted on as fundamental, or made a term of communions.

1. It proves

But this reasoning is faulty in many respects. too much to prove any thing: for, by the same argument, there would be no absolute need of any belief or confession at all: Baptism alone (as in infants) is sufficient to make one a Christian, yea, and to keep him such, even to his life's end, since it imprints an indelible character in such a sense as never to need repeating. 2. Admitting that a very short creed might suffice for Baptism, it does not follow that the same may suffice all along to give a man a right to Christian fellowship; especially when he is found to hold such principles as tend to overthrow that very confession. The whole of Christianity may be virtually implied or included in that single article, of admitting Jesus to be the true Messiah; and therefore the denying any important point of the Christian faith is in effect revoking or

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

recanting that very article. 3. The forms of admission into any society, (though they commonly draw after them an obligation to submit to all the fundamental laws, rules, or maxims of such society,) are not properly the fundamentals themselves: and though a man may have a right to be received as a member upon his passing through such forms, it does not follow that he has a right to continue a member, and to participate of the privileges thereto belonging, while he refuses to submit to the essential rules or maxims of the society, or makes it his endeavour to subvert or destroy them. It is one thing to say what may be barely necessary at admission, and another to say what may be necessary afterwards. General professions may suffice at first, as a pledge and earnest of more particular acknowledgments to come after and if those do not follow, it amounts to a kind of retracting even that general security. 4. It may be further observed, that neither Simon Magus, nor the ancient Judaizers whom St. Paul anathematized; neither Alexander, nor Hymenæus, nor Philetus, (who denied the general resurrection and were delivered over to Satan for it ",) neither the Docetæ of the apostolical age, who denied Christ's humanity and were rejected by St. John; nor even the impious Nicolaitans whom our Lord himself proscribed as unfit for Christian communion: none of those (so far as appears) ever directly threw up their baptismal profession, or denied, in such a sense, that Jesus was the Messiah, or ceased to be Christians in the large import of the name, so as to want to be rebaptized: and yet certainly they had forfeited all right to Christian communion, and were justly rejected as deserters and aliens, for teaching doctrines subversive of the Christian religion. Therefore again, that short creed, or single article, however sufficient it might be to make a nominal Christian, or to keep him so, was yet never allowed sufficient to entitle a subverter of the faith to the right hand of fellowship, or to supersede an explicit acknowledgment of other Gospel doctrines, as fundamental verities. 5. Lastly, I observe, that to deny Jesus to be the Messiah, is in effect to renounce Christianity, and to revert to Judaism, or Paganism, or worse: and therefore the insisting upon that confession only without any thing more, as a term of communion, is as much as to say, that all but downright apostates are to be received as Christian brethren, so far as faith u Ibid. p. 402, 459.

t See Importance &c. vol. iii. p. 401. * Ibid. p. 402, 547.

[blocks in formation]
« ÎnapoiContinuă »