« ZurückWeiter »
The influence of a mother in the domestic circle, is con- ' siderable: she is placed there by Divine Providence, to fill a most important station, -- to discharge duties of the highest consequence, - to form one of the tendcrest, the nearest, and dearest ties of which human nature is susceptible. To her belongs the regulation of the household concerns; and to her care and affections is committed the nurture of her offspring during a period of helpless infancy, when those wants are experienced, and that assistance is required, which none but a mother can supply, which nothing but the most anxious maternal solicitude can afford. On her depends not only the health and vigour of her child, but on her principally devolves the formation of its infant mind. It is niatter for deep concern and much observation, that there are so few who are sufficiently sensible of the importance with which the character of a mo.. ther is invested, or of their influence on that of their children; or who, if aware how much their childrens' tempers and principles depend on their example and instruction, make it ani object, or a part of their duty, to regulate the one, or attend to the other! It is true, that there are many mothers who were themselves bronght up in habits of virtue or religion, and having acquired some ideas of the one or the other, bring up their children, from a mere customary regard to their conduci, in similar habits, and with similar sentiments; and so far, even this is highly commendable: but it is equally true, that there are many, and by far the greater part, who, having no just notions of virtue or religion, are shamefully deficient in the great and important duty alluded to; and who, so long as their children attain to a certain character in society, adapted to their own gross conceptions or vague opinions of doing well, are perfectly indifferent as to what principles their sons and daughters possess, or to what practices they may be addicted; and in this class are to be found, even many who esteem theme selves and who desire to be esteemed, good inothers and tender parents! It is astonishing that perversion can be so gross as it is sometimes seen in those instances of maternal conduct, which, having as strong and lively affection as the motive, yet, in its consequences, leads to the inevitable ruin of the object beloved. Who does not shrink at the relation of a barbarous murder? who can hear of the destruction of the new-born babe, by the cruel and unrelenting hand of her who gave it birth, without feeling the chill of horror run through every vein? Yet where is the difference between the mother who kills the body, and her who destroys the soul of her child ? who, specially charged with the welfare of her offspring, is wholly inattentive to those principles on which, and which
alone, that offspring can be saved from a future state of mi. sery? In point of real turpitude, there is no essential differ ence between the commission of the act which deprives the child of life, and that, omission of duty to which its destruction may be attributed. The one, revolting as it may be to, our nature, is, in comparison with the other, if we take a proper view of the subject, even to be palliated. Poverty and Want may offer some extenuation for the wretched mother who, in a paroxysm of pain and despair, should murder her infant child; but for her who deliberately, with the advantage of education, or religious instruction, is, by her criminal nege ligence, the occasion of the eternal perdition of her own child, - what excuse can be pleaded? Whicit, wien arraigned at the bar of Divine Justice, will she be able to urge on her own behalf? Can there be a inother then, anxious for the good of her children, who does not tremble at the consequences of living regardless of what principles they acquire, umindful of that religion which the Scriptures so forcibly inculcate? Can there be a mother so indifferent to the well-being of her offspring, as not to be roused by these reflections to the consideration of . her duties, and to the attentive discharge of them. Let her remember the responsibility which the relation of Mother imposes on her, --- that the comfort of her children: here, and their happiness hereafter, chiefly depend, with divine, assista, ance, on her advice aixi conduci towards them; and that, by exemplary piety, by early instructing them in divine truth, by addressing herself on their behalf in prayer and in faith to Him who is able to controul all things to his own will, - she is not only securing their permanent felicity, but also pursuing that course which will lead to her own reward, tlironyi tino and through eternity!.
The laudable efforts of Christians to render the Bible cheap, are not altogether neiv. In the ycar 1710, Charles Hildebrand, Baron of Cansein, in Gerinany, published a pro posal, that such a number oftypes should be cast as might compose as many pages as the Bible contains; and that all the forms so composed should be preserved entire, for succeeding impressions. This ineasure was so much approved, that money. was readily contributed to carry it into effect. In the year 1719, the New 'Í'estament was published, together with the Psalter. In the course of thirty inoliths, sevca editions were printed, making the number of 38,000 copies; which were sold for
about four pence each, unbound. In the following year, ani · octavo edițion of the whole Bible was published; and after
wards a large edition in twelves; of the former, 13 copies, and, of the latter 21, were sold for 205. English. By this method, the poorest persons in Germany who could raise a few pence, . were enabled to procure the Scriptures, - Professor Franck's : Letter to Dș. Cotton Mather, printed in Dr. Gillies's biisto.. rical Collections, yol. I, p. 417.
gua the last men in the year 1719, and the
MODERN GREEK TESTAMENT. Professor Franck mentions also the printing of the New Testament in the Sclavonian and in the vulgar Greek la.. guages:
The last mentioned,' says he,“ with the original text added to it, came out in the year 1710; the charges being borne by the Queen Dowager of Prussia, and the book itself designed for the use of the Greek churches; who, by reason of the : tyranny of the Turks, under which they groan, are lut meaniy provided with copies of these divine pracles. There was in- !! deed another edition of the New Testament, printed in vulgar Greek, in London, about the beginning of this present century; but the original text being wanting in that edition, it was supposed that both texts, being fitly joined together, might prove more useful and agreeable to the churches in the Levant! - Page 416.
An edition of the Greek Testament, having the original text and modern Greek in opposite columns, is now printing by the British and Foreign Bible Society,
THE CALVINISTIC AND ARMINIAN DOCTRINES
[In a Letter to a Friend.} My dear Friend,
As one sincerely desirous of being instructed in the good jvays of the Lord, you ask in your last, Does not the doctrine of the Armiņians seem to afford greater hope of salvation to șinners in general, than the doctrine of the Calvinists?' I am well aware that Arminian preachers frequently say, 'That they preach free grace to all, but that Calvinists preach free: grace only to a few. They believe, and wish their hearers to believe, that the drininian doctrine does afford greater hope of salvation to sinners in general, than the Calvinistic doctrine. However, I desire you will impartially consider whether thişi be not a misapprehension of the matter. . I will take the liberty of appealing to yourself, and all. others who have had frequent opportunities of attending the
preaching of Calvinists, whether their preaching, in general, tends in the least to discourage penitent sinners, who are convinced of their lost and ruined state, to come to Jesus Christ for life and salvation. Do they not most earnestly and affectionately invite sinners of every description to come? Do“ they not shew, according to the word, that God does not reject any who are willing to receive the salvation that is in Christ? Therefore, the doctrine of Calvinists affords the most satisfactory hope of salvation to all who are willing to accept it in God's way. How then does the doctrine of Arminians afford greater hope? Does it afford hope to such as continue impenitent and unwilling to aocept of the glorious salvation which is in Christ ? Certainly not. Then, I ask again, how does the doctrine of Arminians afford greater hope of salvation to sinners in general, than the doctrine of Calvinists ? .
I desire you will further consider, whether the doctrine of Calvinists does not afford greater hope of salvation to sinners in general, than the doctrine of Arminians: All the hope the doctrine of Arminians affords, depends on the supposed strength of sinners in general to come to Jesus Christ; for they will not allow that God bestows distinguishing grace upon any one more than another. If they were to allow this, they would allow what would amount to as much as Calvinists understand by Election : and, indeed, the hope that depends on the strength of a sinner to come to Jesus before he is created anew and born of God, is but a very weak one; for man is dead in trespasses, and sins ;'-' he is darkness;' his. carnal mind is enmity against God ;'- yea, his eninity is such, that he cannot come to Jesus except the Father draw him :' therefore, the doctrine of Arminians does not afford the least hope of salvation to any sinner who believes his state to be such as it is represented in the word of God; but, ąccording to the doctrine of Calvinists, myriads of the fallen race of Adam have been given to Christ, and these shall all certainly come to him, and have everlasting life. “He shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days; and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hands. He shall see of the travail of his soul and shall be satisfied.'
In a word, the doctrines of Arminians and Calvinists agree in shewing, that God will certainly receive every returning sinner; they agree in shewing, that · Every one who asketle receiveth, and he who seeketh findeth, and to him that knocketh it shall be opened ;'- bint the doctrine of Arminians does not afford the least certainty that any one will come to ask, seek, or knock; while the doctrine of Calvinisțs affords the greatest certainty, - a certainty founded on the promise and faithfulness of the unchanging God, ' That a people numerotas as the morning dew, shall be made willing in the day of his power. Therefore, judge you, my dear friend, whether
CALVINISTIC AND ARMINIAN DOCTRINES COMPARED. 63 the doctrines of Arminians or Calvinists afford the greatest hope of salvation to sinners in general.
The doctrine of Election (as it is held by Calvinists in general) never does any harm to any man. It never has caused the destruction of any; but has caused the salvation of thousands. It keeps none from Christ; but draws many to him, even as many as do come to him. When seven thousand were saved from the almost general apostacy in Israel, in the days of Elijah, by the election of grace, clection did infinite good to the said seven thousand who were saved, while it did no harm to the rest. When many thousands of the Jews were saved in the same manner, in the days of Christ and his apostles, election did unspeakable good to so many as were saved, while it made the circumstances of the rest no worse. Therefore, if election does so much good to myriads, while it injures none, here is no room to find fault; but with adoration to admire the riches of God's grace. It is a certain fact, that God saved Saul, the persecutor. As an unchanging God, he must have acted herein according to a previous design; or, which is the same thing, he must have saved him 'according to the election of grace. It must be adınitted, that this act was a most merciful act with regard to Saul himself; and herein God injured no man living, neither in this world nor the next: he thereby put no impediment in the way of the sal· yation of any man; and if God injured no man by actually saving Saul in time, he certainly injured no man by purposing from eternity to save him. The same observation will hold good with regard to every one who shall stand at the right hand of the Judge at last. God's decree of election is neither more 'nor less than his eternal design to do good, and only good, in the salvation of sinners. Election hath nothing to do with any who perish; therefore, there is nothing forbidding in the election which Calvinists preach. It is not an election that drives sinners from Christ, but that draws sinners to Christ. It appears to me, that all the success which has attended the ministry even of Arminians themselves (and I have no doubt that the ministry of many of them has been attended with great success) is ultimately ascribable to God's gracious decree of election. I remain, dear friend, &c.
J. R, Llanbrynmair.
ANECDOTE OF THE LATE REV. MR. HERVEY.
The late Mr. Romaine being in the company of Mr. Hervey, who was much indisposed, at breakfast, observed him retire to another part of the room, taking with him a small bason of milk; and overheard him praying over it, thus:'Lord, if I obtain no nourishment from this food which thou hast given me, at least let me get thankfulness from it.'
Brown's Memoirs of Herrey.