is the author of grace and truth, for the Gospel is founded on his blood, on his propitiation, and merit. 2. Mofes was not, properly speaking, the mediator of God's covenant with the Ifraelites, although he is fo called in Scripture, because he was a typical mediator, that is, a fimple interpreter between God and the people. If God honoured him thus, it was neither in confideration of his perfonal merit, nor on account of the love, which God had for him, that fuch a covenant was made; Mofes himself was a finner, and a real mediator he wanted himself but with Jesus Christ, on his own account, and for the love, which the Father had for him, the covenant of grace was made, &c. 3. Mofes could indeed report the fentiments and words of the people to God: but he could neither become a guarantee for their prefent fincerity nor their future perfeverance: not only because he could not govern their hearts, but even because he did not know them: but Jefus Chrift is men's furety and refpondent to God, both for the fincerity of their faith and holiness, and alfo for their final perfeverance; for he intimately knows the hearts of men, and, being Lord of all, bows and turns them as he pleases. 4. The fpirit, which accompanied the legal œconomy, did not proceed from Mofes, Mofes was neither the fource, nor the difpenfer of it: but Jefus Chrift is the true origin of this bleffing; it is his fpirit, which the faithful receive, of his fulness (fays S. John) have all we received, and grace for grace. 5. Mofes's miracles were wrought not by his own, but by a foreign power: but Jefus Chrift wrought his miracles by his own power, &c. Finally, Mofes was only established as a fervant over the house of God: but Jefus Chrift as a fon, that is, as mafter and heir. For Mofes indeed was a mere man: but Chrift is the Son of God, and God hath bleffed him for ever. Of him Mofes prophefied, when he faid, The Lord thy God will raise up unto thee a prophet like unto me, him fhall ye bear. Deut. xviii. 15, 16. (5) (5) This literal method of explication, of which Mr. Claude has given the above example, is very juftly accounted the best way of interpreting Scripture, by the most fenfible men among both Jews and chriftians. "The Jews, fays a learned Swifs, ufe different methods of expounding Scripture. Aben Ezra reckons five ways, which prevail among them. The firft is the method of the eastern Jews, and, properly fpeaking, is no method at all. It is a collecting of heterogeneous articles. Thus one Rabbi Ifaac published two huge volumes on the first chapter of Genefis. The second is the Sadducean method, which, rejecting all comments, takes the literal meaning only. The third rejects the literal fenfe, and turns all into allegory. The fourth admits the allegorical method, and fancifully extracts doctrines from points, numeral letters, &c. The fifth (quod genus interpretandi optimum eit.) explains the literal, genuine, and grammatical fenfe, admits and investigates There the doârine, that arifes from the text fo explained, and refutes and rejects other fenfes." Hottingeri Thefaur. Philol. I. i, cap. 2. f. 1. De Theol. in ge nere. A man, who allows his fancy to play with Scripture, may make any thing of it. The following parallel, delivered in a fermon at S. Paul's, London, before the gentlemen of Nottinghamshire, on the day of their yearly feaft, may ferve for an example. "The town of Nottingham doth run parallel with Jerufalem. Was Jerufalem fet upon precipitous hills, and is not Nottingham fo? And as the mountains food about Jerufalem, do they not fo about Nottingham ? And as there were two famous afcents in Jerufalem, is it not fo in Nottingham ? - - - I need not tell you, that the foul of man is a precious thing, and the lofs thereof fad in any country; yet methinks in the agucifh parts of Kent and Effex, where I have feen fometimes a whole parifh fick together, the fouls, that mif carry There are fome texts, which must be difcuffed by way of explication, although neither terms. carry thence, feem but to go from purgatory to hell: but thofe, that perifh out of Nottinghamshire, go from heaven to hell. When a foul mifcarries out of Nottinghamfhire, methinks in melancholy vifions I fee the infernal fpirits flocking about it, and faying, Art thou come from thofe pleasant mountains to thefe Stygian lakes?" &c. &c. Was it worth a man's while to come, as the preacher tells his auditors he did, " twentyfour miles in flabby weather" to preach fuch ftuff as this? Everlasting Covenant, by Marmaduke James. Moni. Du-Pin, among various methods of expounding Scripture, fpeaks of what he calls literal commentaries; of which kind is this of Mr. Claude. 66 Thefe explain the true fenfe and meaning of the words of the text; nor are they confined only to the immediate signification of the words and terms, but take in alfo all the proper, natural and neceffary fenfes of the text and thus the allegorical fenfe of the first fort of commentaries will come into thefe, as well as the literal. The earliest fathers, although they seem to have had more regard to the allegorical than the literal fenfe, in their difcourfes and commentaries ad nor dreffed to the chriftians; yet they did not for that reafon neglect or defpife the literal fenfe, as is evident from their dogmatical treatises against the Jews and beretics. They knew very well, that those arbitrary fenfes were not to be brought in proof of any thing, but that the natural and necefary fenfe of the prophets, or other paffages of Scripture, was only fit to be used in confirmation of their doctrines. Thus S. Juftin, in his dialogue with Trypho, clears up the natural fenfe of the prophecies, and examines their proper fignification. In like manner alfo S. Irenæus, in his works Adverfus Hærefes, opposes to the allegorical explications of the Valentinians and Gnoftics, to prove their fabulous doctrines, the true and natural fense of the fame paffages they so abused. Therefore Jerom fays upon Mat. xiii. Pius quidem fenfus, fed nunquam parabola et dubia ænigmatum intelligentia poteft ad authoritatem dogmatum proficere. fathers always in their dogmatical works, adhered clofely to the literal fense of Holy Scripture; nevertheless, in their commentaries, which were either homilies, or other works made for the inftruction and edification of the The faith nor things are difficult: but because the matter is important, and a meditation of it beautiful and faithful, they took the liberty to make ufe of allegorical and arbitrary fenfes without ftaying long upon the literal. Diodorus, of Tarfus, was one of the first that applied himself to this literal way of commenting, and he was followed by Theodoret, Theophylact, Oecumenius, Procopius of Gaza, the learned Ifidore and Chryfoftom: the latter is certainly the man who has excelled moft, and has given proof of the beauty and advantage of this way of writing." Du-Pin's Meth. of Stud. Divin. chap. viii. What Monf. Du-Pin calls allegorical, and arbitrary fenfes of Holy Scripture have been pleaded for by fome good men, on account of the excellent effects, which are produced by them on the hearers. We beg leave to obferve two things. 1. None but ferling moral effects can be admitted in evidence here. A great concourfe of hearers, a clofe attention to the preacher, an affectionate moving of the paffions, loud acciamations of praife, and many other fuch effects, we all know, may be produced by a thoufand circumflances foreign from the energy of the holy fpirit; none of thefe, therefore, ought to be confidered as demenftrative of the prefence and approbation of the fupreme full Being in point of religion. 2. The noblest moral effects have been fometimes produced by means, which were neither piritual, nor good in themselves. Some have been converted to chriftianity by reading Virgil. Is Virgil's fourth eclogue therefore a good and spiritual fenfe of Holy Scripture? multa "Per Virgilius, quæ Chrifto dicunætati aureæ tribuit chriftianis ita probata funt, tur a fybillis attributa. Quæ ut Græci hanc eclogam græce converterint, et divus Auguf tinus fentiat fpiritum fanétum Et fatis conftat Secundianum per os inimicorum locutum. pi&torem, et Marcellianum bus confideratis chriftianos facoratorem, hujus ecloga verfi tos effe." Pet. Rami. Pra lett. in 4to. Eclog. Virgil. Our beft English preachers ral good of their hearers, and have always aimed at the mothey have fuppofed, that what Monf. Du-Pin calls the natural and neceffary fenfe of Scripture was beft calculated to produce moral effects. Many examples might be given: but one fhall fuffice at prefent. The firft malter of Emanuel College, in Cambridge, was the pulpit, and his method a man eminently uteful in will exemplify my meaning. Suprema illi concionandi lex erat populi falus. Neque id ille in concionando egit ut audito full of edification. Paffages of this kind muft needs be propofed in all their extent. Take, for example, thefe words of S. Paul, 2 Cor. iv. 7. We have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us. This paffage is of this fort, the terms are eafy, auditorum aures inani verborum tinnitu deliniret: fed ut res utiliffimas fuaviter in illorum pectora infinuaret; ut ad auditorum captum fermonem fuum attemperaret, eorumque adeo fidem ac pietatem unice promoveret. Admirable defign! How worthy the breaft of a chriftian minifter! Well, what means did he ufe to obtain his noble end? Egregia illi erat in S. Scripturæ fenfu indaganda folertia, in eruendo felicitas, in agnofcendo perfpicacitas, in eloquendo facilitas et perfpicuitas. Ipfe ad con cionandum acceffit tam a natura quam ab arte mirifice comparatus ; quibus accedente divina gratia, et incredibili animas lucrifaciendi ftudio ac defiderio, mirum quantum is in roftris dominabatur. This is an excellent model, and fuch pulpit accomplishments as thefe are infinitely preferable to the fantastic art of whipping all Scripture into froth. Vita Laurentii Chadertoni, a W. Dillingham. The following remarks of the Archbishop of Cambray are not foreign from this article. "If the clergy applied themselves to the ancient way of making homilies, we fhould then have two different forts of preachers. They who have no vivacity or a poetical genius, would explain the Scriptures clearly, without imitating its lively noble manner: and if they expounded the word of God judiciously, and fupported their doctrine by an exemplary life, they would be very good preachers. They would have what S. Ambrofe requires, a chate, fimple, clear ftile, full of weight and gravity; without. affecting elegance, or defpifing the imoothness and graces of language. The other fort having a poetical turn of mind, would explain the Scripture in its own file and figures, and by that means become accomplished preachers. One fort would inftruct people with clearness, force, and dignity: and the other would add to this powerful inftruction, the fublimity, the enthufiafm, and vehemence of Scripture: fo that it would (if I may fo fay) be intire, and living in them, as much as it can be in men who are not miraculoufly infpired from above." Fenelen's Dialogues on Eloquence, dial. 3. |