"Perhaps it will be thought needful, that I should define, with greater precision than I have hitherto done, what I mean by the popular doctrine; especially as I have considered many as preachers thereof who differ remarkably from each other; and particularly as I have ranked amongst them Mr. Wesley, who may justly be reckoned one of the most virulent reproachers of that God, whose character is drawn by the apostles, that this island has produced. To remove all doubt concerning my meaning, I shall thus explain myself.
Throughout these letters, I consider all those as teachers of the popular doctrine, who seek to have credit and influence among the people, by resting our acceptance with God, not simply on what Christ hath done, but more or less on the use we make him, the advance we make toward him, or some secret desire, wish, or sigh to do so; or on something we feel or do concerning him, by the assistance of some kind of grace or spirit; or, lastly, on something we employ him to do, and suppose he is yet to do for us. In sum, all who would have us to be conscious of something else than the bare truth of the gospel; all who would have us to be conscious of some beginning of a change to the better, or some desire, however faint, toward such change, in order to our acceptance with God; these I call the popular preachers, however much they may differ from each other about faith, and grace, special or common, or about anything else. For I am disposed rather to reconcile than widen the various difference among them.
But my resentment is all along chiefly pointed against the capital branch of the popular doctrine, which, while it asserts almost all the articles belonging to the sacred truth, at the same time deceitfully clogs them with the opposite falsehoods. This I would compare to a chain having one link of gold and another of brass alternately: or, I would call it a two-fold cord, wherein one thread of truth and another of falsehood are all along entwisted together. If we think of its practical address to, and influence on the minds of the people, as contrasted with its formally avowed tenets, it resembles a whited sepulcher, inwardly full of rottenness." - Robert Sandeman, Letters on Theron and Aspasio
Throughout these letters, I consider all those as teachers of the popular doctrine, who seek to have credit and influence among the people, by resting our acceptance with God, not simply on what Christ hath done, but more or less on the use we make him, the advance we make toward him, or some secret desire, wish, or sigh to do so; or on something we feel or do concerning him, by the assistance of some kind of grace or spirit; or, lastly, on something we employ him to do, and suppose he is yet to do for us. In sum, all who would have us to be conscious of something else than the bare truth of the gospel; all who would have us to be conscious of some beginning of a change to the better, or some desire, however faint, toward such change, in order to our acceptance with God; these I call the popular preachers, however much they may differ from each other about faith, and grace, special or common, or about anything else. For I am disposed rather to reconcile than widen the various difference among them.
But my resentment is all along chiefly pointed against the capital branch of the popular doctrine, which, while it asserts almost all the articles belonging to the sacred truth, at the same time deceitfully clogs them with the opposite falsehoods. This I would compare to a chain having one link of gold and another of brass alternately: or, I would call it a two-fold cord, wherein one thread of truth and another of falsehood are all along entwisted together. If we think of its practical address to, and influence on the minds of the people, as contrasted with its formally avowed tenets, it resembles a whited sepulcher, inwardly full of rottenness." - Robert Sandeman, Letters on Theron and Aspasio
No comments:
Post a Comment