Synod. [John Abernethy, who became one of the | to Dublin, but refused it. For this he incurred most eminent among the Dissenting ministers the violent displeasure of the Presbyterian of Ireland, was born at Coleraine on the 19th October, 1680. At nine years of age he was Soon after this Abernethy entered with carried into Scotland by a relation, to avoid much zeal into the formation of a society the horrors of the insurrection, in which all chiefly composed of ministers, and having for the other children of his parents were lost. its object "improvement in knowledge, by For some years he was kept at a grammar- bringing things to the test of reason and Scripschool, and afterwards sent to Glasgow Uni- ture, without having a servile regard to any versity, where in due course he took the degree human authority." This society, which, from of M.A. From Glasgow he moved to Edin- its place of meeting, was called the Belfast burgh for the purpose of studying divinity, Society, soon became troubled with hot debates and he was so successful a student that he was and fierce dissensions on the question of sublicensed to preach before he had attained his scription to the Westminster Confession. The twenty-first year. In 1703 he received a call matter was carried into the General Synod, from a congregation in Antrim, and, accepting and ended in 1726 in a complete rupture, it, was ordained. He soon became famous for Abernethy and his friends, the non-subscrihis eloquence not only in his own parish but bers, being declared no longer members of the through a wide district. In 1717 he had a call | body. Upon this the greater part of his con VOL I 11 tion; when all this is apparent in the constitution of any community, no one will attribute it to a casual unconcerted encounter of men, since there are so plain evidences of wisdom and design in the whole scheme. As little reason is there to imagine, that when a species of intelligent beings are sent into the world with sentiments of morality, which are so evidently conducive to their happiness, tending to improve their nature, to ennoble the life of every one of them, filling it with a variety of rational pleasure, and to render them eminently useful to one another, so that it is hardly to be conceived to what a height of perfection and felicity they would be raised if these moral sentiments were duly improved and had their full effect; and, on the other hand, how miserable the whole race would be if entirely destitute of them; it is unreasonable, I say, to imagine that this should be without a directing intelligence in the cause of it. gregation forsook him, and he accepted an offer | those irregularities which threaten its destrucfrom a congregation in Wood Street, Dublin. This struggle was undoubtedly the prelude to the subsequent division of the Arian and Socinian element in the Irish Presbyterian Church. Abernethy took a prominent part in the memorable controversy relating to religious tests and disabilities. He took up the position that religion should not exclude men of talent from political office, and he was so far in advance of the opinions of the time that he gave it as his firm conviction that a Presbyterian or Roman Catholic might be a man of ability, and thus fitted to serve his country. He laboured in Dublin for ten years, adding greatly to his reputation, and during which period he wrote an immense number of eloquent and weighty sermons and tracts. In 1740 he was attacked by gout in a vital part, and died in December of that year, leaving behind him a great mass of sermons and tracts, still highly valued by students of his own school, and the work for which he is now chiefly known, Discourses concerning the Being Nothing can be more groundless and unand Natural Perfections of God, which has been supported with any pretence of reason than declared, "for solidity of argument, strength to allege that the notions of morality so comand clearness of reasoning, and justness of mon and prevailing in the world were origisentiment, equal if not superior to anything nally invented by politicians, and by their of the kind in the English language." It artifice imposed upon credulous mankind as was given to the world in 1743, two volumes the dictates of nature. For besides that of the sermons were issued in 1748, and in strict virtue is often too little agreeable to the 1751 a selection from the tracts, &c., appeared.] maxims and measures of their policy to give it any appearance of proceeding from such an original, every man who will look carefully into his own heart may find there a standard THE EXISTENCE OF GOD PROVED BY of right and wrong prior to any instructions, HUMAN MORALITY.1 The importance of morality to the human life and to its main ends shows wisdom and design in giving men the sense and knowledge of it. Political constitutions are reasonably judged to be formed with understanding because of the ends which they answer. When laws are well framed for the preservation of public peace and order, the measures of civil authority and subjection wisely settled, provision made for supporting the legal powers of the rulers and liberties of the people, for securing them against foreign invasions and intestine broils, for deciding their debates about property in an equitable manner, for encouraging industry and other virtues, which tend to the benefit of society, and restraining 1 This and the following extract are from Discourses concerning the Being and Natural Perfections of God. declarations, and laws of men, whereby he pronounces judgment upon them. Nor was it ever known that any human invention, nor anything which was not the voice of reason and nature itself, appeared so uniform and unvaried, always consistent with itself, and always in the same light to the minds of men, as the principal moral species do. The forms of civil government differ according to the circumstances and inclinations of the people who create them, the external forms of religion too are variable, and so is everything of positive appointment and institution; but justice and mercy, gratitude and truth, never alter; the learned and the unlearned, the most uninstructed and the most polite nations agree in their notions concerning them, and whenever they are intelligibly proposed approve them. It is, therefore, evident that morality is a part of the human constitution, and must be can shut his eyes against this evidence is hardened beyond the power of reasonable conviction, and is no more fit to be argued with. RELIGION AND TRUE INTEREST But the writers in this controversy against attributed to its Author. Let this be understood in a sense agreeable to the nature of the thing. I do not mean that we are necessarily virtuous, as we are sensitive and intelligent, or that the practice of virtue is so essential that no man can possibly be without it, for the very notion of it imports free agency or choice; but I mean that the mind of man is so framed, as, when it attains the full exercise of its rational powers, to be necessarily sensible of moral obligations, and so far deter-religion, against natural morality and the mined to satisfy them that it cannot wilfully and designedly act a contrary part without doing violence to itself, which is all the necessity that is consistent with the nature of such a being and the nature of morality. If it be so we may surely infer that the cause of this constitution was intelligent, since all the individuals of mankind are found to have a sense of virtue, and every one who reflects upon it must be conscious that it is engraven upon his heart prior to any intention of his own, or any instruction that he knows of: it must either have happened without any design at all, or it must have been designed by the Author of our being. To say that moral agency, which is so universally the character of men that without it no one can be reckoned perfectly of the kind, and which is of so great importance, not only to the ornament and convenience of life, but to all the highest purposes of our being, so far that the want of it would make an essential difference in the species-to say that this is merely accidental, in other words, that there is no cause to be assigned for it at all, is too gross an absurdity to require any confutation. If our minds can rest satisfied with that solution there is an end of all rational inquiry; it may be said everything came from nothing, and there is no cause to be sought of any perfection whatever. But if this be what we cannot possibly acquiesce in, and indeed I will venture to say no man can, however he may force himself to a stupid inattention, there is nothing left to conclude but that we were made moral agents by an intending intelligent cause. I do not at present carry the argument so far as to infer from it the moral perfections of the Deity, though it will very well bear even that; but he that will shut his eyes against the evidence of understanding and design in the formation of the human nature, as we see it is formed universally, with a sense of virtue and vice, good and evil, right and wrong in actions, and with a necessary approbation of the one and disapprobation of the other; I say, he that social affections of mankind, seem to be diffi- Let any one the highest human authority, and refusing obedience to them when it judges them to be wrong; whereas their principles vest the civil sovereign with an absolute supremacy which no one has a right to dispute, but must implicitly yield, even in actual obedience to all its commands. I shall not insist on the abject condition to which this reduces the whole of mankind except the few who have the supreme magistracy in their hands, because the men we have to do with in the present debate avow no feeling of it, having professedly abandoned all sense of honour, liberty, and virtue, unless so far as they are subservient to private interest. But with respect to the security of government itself, though we grant it is true that the principles of religion establish in every man a supremacy for himself, so that his conscience must be the last judge of his own actions, yet this supremacy does not make void the proper exercise of civil authority nor hinder its effects. For the right of conscience, importing not merely a liberty but an obligation to do what is right and fit, is the greatest security of just obedience to the power ordained of God, as well as of everything else morally good that the human nature is capable of. But the question is, What advantage will be gained to the civil power if conscience be displaced? Does the atheistical scheme substitute nothing in its room which may be equally dangerous? Yes, certainly, for it transfers the supremacy to arbitrary will, lust, and passion, all summed up in self-love, or the desire of private happiness, that is, pleasure, which of right is the absolute ruler in every human heart, and reason is intended not to control but to minister to it. Is this more friendly to civil sovereignty than conscience, which is founded on the notion of a real and essential difference in the nature of things, between just and unjust, moral good and evil, and therefore must tie up men's hands from public mischiefs, though they might gratify their own humours and inclinations? CHRISTIANITY OPPOSED TO PERSECUTION.1 Our blessed Saviour had it in view, by his gospel, to promote the common happiness of mankind upon the foundations of virtue and From a collection of Scarce and Valuable Tracts, &c., published in 1751. charity, and to restore and preserve peace among them by uniting their affections, and delivering them from the dominion of those lusts which warred in their members, the causes of their wars and fightings, confusion and every evil work. But whereas concord was unhappily broken, and the world became a scene of disorder, not only the selfish passions of men set them at variance, but religion itself was so far perverted as to be the cause of hatred and animosity; in such a case it was impossible to reunite their alienated hearts and re-establish harmony otherwise than by changing their sentiments and giving them truer notions both of piety towards God and benevolence to men, showing them that the former is the sure foundation and the chief support of the other, and that the true perfection of our nature consists in an imitation of the divine moral attributes which will lead us to an inviolable regard to the felicity of mankind in general, and of every individual as far as it is in our power. This is of the very essence of the Christian scheme. And in order to carry it on the more effectually, the great Author supposes the state of things, when he published it, to be just as it was in fact: that men were enemies to one another, proud, wrathful, and contentious, many of them the most of all averse to those who distinguished themselves by the purity and simplicity of their worship and the innocence of their whole behaviour. I say, supposing this to be the case, our Saviour teaches those who would embrace his institution to accommodate their deportment to the condition in which they actually were, that is, being as sheep in the midst of wolves, fierce adversaries of their profession and their persons, who would persecute and despitefully use them; to exhibit to the world bright examples of the most exalted benevolence and charity, by rendering love for hatred, and the best offices in their power for cruel treatment. If, indeed, the Christian doctrines were universally and sincerely embraced, and the word of Christ had its proper influence on the minds of all men, there would be peace on earth and mutual good-will among men; fierceness and cruelty, with their horrid effects, misery and desolation, must cease; there could then be no such thing as forgiveness, and the exercise of meekness, strictly speaking, because there would be no hatred, persecution, and despiteful usage. But when it is otherwise, and we are in a mixed imperfect state, the best having their infirmities and a great many full of the leaven of malice and wickedness, the children of God must be blameless and harmless, without rebuke in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation, shining as lights in the world. We cannot but be sensible that this is what our blessed Master indispensably requires as most conducive to his service and the honour of his religion, and absolutely necessary to our obtaining his approbation. That the obligation upon Christians is universal, extending to all men and all cases wherein they can be, is evident from the supposition of the text, which is that of the severest trials from men, even of enmity, cursing, persecution, and despiteful usage. If all this does not dissolve the bond of benevolence it is hard to tell what does, or to imagine anything which can set us more at distance, and provoke and even justify resentment instead of kindness. Enmity or hatred with their bitter fruits may be conceived as arising either from private passions and interfering interests, or from public differences, particularly in religion. It is certain these latter are often as fierce as any, and I think 'tis plain they are not excluded from the meaning of the text, that is, that the disciples of Christ should not only be ready to forgive private injuries, and to render good for them, but that they should have the same dispositions towards the adversaries of their religious profession. Nay, this indeed was the primary intention of the many charges of this sort which our Saviour gave to his first followers. He does not suppose them only or principally to be involved in personal quarrels with their neighbours, but to be exposed to the rage and fury of men because of their religious sentiments and practices. Thus he warns the apostles that they should be called before kings and councils for his sake, that is, for their adherence to his doctrine and precepts, and that such differences should arise about Christianity that families would be divided in their affections, fathers and sons, mothers and daughters set against each other, and a man's foes be those of his own house. This was exemplified in the primitive Christians, cruelly persecuted for the sake of their religion. Their Master went before them in enduring all manner of reproaches and ill-usage for his good offices to mankind, in endeavouring their reformation; and in the last extremity of distress, when led as a lamb to the slaughter, he was dumb, not opening his mouth in threatenings or invectives, but prayed, "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do," leaving us an example that we should follow his steps. After him, Stephen, with his last breath, returned prayers for curses, crying, just as he expired by the hands of barbarous men stoning him to death, "Lord, lay not this sin to their charge." So did all the apostles still maintain their innocence unblemished, and their charity inviolable, even to their most cruel persecutors. All this is not to be understood as if Christianity were intended to destroy the unalterable right of mankind to defend their lives and their liberties, among which that of conscience is the most sacred, against unjust violence, as if we were obliged by the rules of our religions to offer our throats to ruffians, and submit universally to the most lawless tyranny. But the religion of the Holy Jesus forbids revenge. Even when necessary, selfdefence is allowed, nay, is most just and honourable. Christians should be always ready to be reconciled, never carrying their resentment farther than self-preservation requires. When that end is obtained, and force is no more needed to repel causeless wrongs, then the offices of love take place; the utmost cruelties ought not to be retaliated. In the case of the apostles and other primitive Christians the right of self-defence was entirely out of the question. Their situation was such that it was not in their power to use it. And so God was pleased to order, in his infinite wisdom, that in them might be exemplified illustriously the virtues of meekness, patience, and charity, which are the glory of his gospel, for a pattern to all who should afterwards believe, and for a testimony to the world of the truth, the purity, and the innocence of the Christian faith. But at all times Christianity appears, as originally delivered by its blessed Author, to be an inoffensive institution, breathing nothing but peace, and tending to inspire its professors with the strongest sentiments of kindness and good-will to all men-kindness not to be extinguished even by hatred, injuries, and affronts, so far from giving any allowance to rage and cruelty in the defence and provocation of it; of which we have a remarkable instance in the severe reproof our Saviour gave to two of his disciples, who moved to have fire come down from heaven to destroy some of the Samaritans because they refused to receive him into their village. He turned and rebuked them and said, "Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of, for the Son of man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them." |