Imatges de pÓgina
PDF
EPUB

* No

An Essay on the Nature and Design of Sacrifices under the Mosaic Law. 335 From which ceremony the goat be. 25, &c.); and we learn from the last came so polluted with the stain of verse of this chapter of Leviticus, that these sins, that it polluted him by the reason, or rather the rule of this whom it was led away with a kind of distinction, was, that those were not corresponding stain: as appears from to be eaten of which the blood was his not being permitted to return to brought into the holy place and sprinthe camp till he had washed his clothes kled" towards the mercy-seat. and bathed in water. Lastly, it is to sin-offering, whereof

any of the blood be observed, with respect to such vice is brought into the Tabernacle of the tims in piacular sacrifices, as had their congregation to reconcile withal in blood carried into the holy place, but the holy place, shall be eaten; it shall their bodies burnt without the camp, be burnt in the fire." (Lev. vi. 30.) after imposition of hands and confes It is maintained, indeed, by some, sion of sins, that thus a similar pollu- that the flesh of all sin offerings betion arose in them as that of the came polluted by the rite of sacrifice, scape-goat. Which appears from the and that whereas it is said, (Lev. vi. pollution of those who carried their 18,) “ Every one that toucheth it bodies out of the camp to burn them, shall be holy,” this should be renFrom these circumstances there ap- dered “shall be sanctified or cleansed," pears (in the opinion of Dr. Outram) shall be under the necessity of cleansThe clearest indication of vicarious pu, ing himself. In proof of this, Dr. nishment."

Magee appeals to what is adduced in What creates suspicion of the un, Wall's Critical Notes, where he says soundness of this argument, is the this point is most satisfactorily treated. small proportion of cases in which the We have not access to this work, and įmposition of hands and (supposed) shall, therefore, only say that we reconfession of sins over the victim quire more than Dr. Magee's dictum seems to convey this impurity. For to persuade us that Wall or any man there are only four instances of it. can prove that flesh, of which the iniThe sin offering of ignorance for the nistering priests ate, in the holy place, bigh-priest, (Lev. iv. 3,) that for the as of a most holy thing, was such as whole congregation, (Lev. iv. 13,) and to pollute and contaminate those who the sip-offerings at the festival of ex touched it. piation, one for the high-priest and We are not called upon at present house of Aaron, another for the con- to give any theory for the explanation gregation of Israel. (Lev. xvi.) There of that pollution which seems to have is no indication of impurity being con. inhered in the bodies of those sinveyed to the victim by imposition of offerings of which the blood had been hands in the following cases : the sin- taken into the holy, or most holy offering for any of the common people place. Only we appeal to the judgwho had sinned through ignorance; ment of our readers, to determine the sin-offering of ignorance for a whether these few instances in which ruler, all the trespass-offerings, peace- sacrifices for sin seem to have involved offerings and burnt-offerings. Now, pollution, out of a great number of the flesh of the victims employed in other sin-offerings which involve no these, various sacrifices, so far froin idea of pollution, can be considered as being considered as polluted by sacri- conclusive. fice, was either wholly consumed on As far as we have yet gone, therethe altar, or was used in holy festivals, fore, we have seen nothing that proves or else was the portion and subsistence the vicarious import of Jewish sacriof the priests who officiated, Nay, it fices. And yet, if this be not proved, is sometimes pronounced to be most it seems obvious that the whole of holy, and on that account not to be what is commonly called the orthodox eaten but in the holy place, by every system, of typical sacrifices, imputed male of the family of Aaron.' (Lev. sins, &c., must fall to the ground. vii. 6.)

Dr. Magee, indeed, who evidently And this is particularly affirmed re- wishes to elude the task of maintainspecting the flesh of all sin-offerings, ing the old scheme of a " literal excepting those cases of sin-offering translation of guilt and punishment which have been particularized as be from the offender to the victim," and ing burnt without the camp (Ley, vi. who congratulates himself on his nice

selection of the phrase "vicarious aggravated cases was inflicted upon import of the Mosaic sacrifices,” de- the offender himself, in lighter offences clares even this position to be unne was transferred to his viction, and that cessary for the establishment of his the punishment of the beast was submain argument, and after having be- stituted for the punishment of the stowed more than twenty pages upon

man ?” the proof of vicarious import in the We must profess ourselves incapaMosaic sacrifices, subjoins a No. 40, ble of perceiving these evident marks in which he amusingly tells his fatigueil of vicarious punishment, which our reader that all this had been "an author claims for the instances which argument ex abundanti," and had he here adduces. May not the folbeen introduced rather for the purpose lowing explanation sufficiently account of shewing the futility of objections so for this difference of treatment, nameconfidently relied on, than as essentially, that when the offence was too light to his inquiry.

and fugitive to be treated in a strict, All that Dr. Magee considers as judicial way, the Divine Lawgiver was necessary to the defence of what is pleased to appoint a method by which called orthodoxy on this subject, is to the offender might be reconciled as a shew that the Jewish sacrifices were worshiper? propitiatory, (or in other words, says The ceremony of shedding and he, No. 40,) that in consequence of sprinkling the blood of the victim in the sacrifice of the animal, and in virtue the ritual of the Mosaic sacrifices, is of it, either immediately or reinotely, thought to be a strong argument in the pardon of (sin in) the offender was favour of the opinion of vicarious puprocured.

nishment. And though, as we have For our own part, however, we are observed already, any force which this of a different opinion, and feel it ne- may appear to have from other consicessary to maintain the position still derations is weakened by the occurfurther against all objectors, that the rence of the ceremony in Mosaic saMosaic law contains nothing emble- crifices of all

that is, in a great matical of vicarious punishment.

number of sacrifices where no confesThere is an argument, used by Dr. sion of sins took place, and conseOutram, on the opposite side of the quently no vicarious import could question, which it seems proper to possibly be conveyed; yet it must be examine. He says, (lib. 1. cap. xxi. allowed that more is to be said in de$ 6,)“ Although there is a somewhat fence of the vicarious import of this clearer indication of vicarious punishe part of the sacrificial rite than any ment in those sacrifices in which the other. blood of the victims was carried into There is a passage in Leviticus, the holy place, and their bodies burnt which is certainly more like an indicawithout the camp, yet the same mean tion of the vicarious substitution of ing really existed in all the other life for life than any other passage to trespass and sin-offerings. Which be found in Scripture relating to Mois apparent from this, that when of- saic sacrifices. It is as follows, (chap. fences of a more aggravated nature xvii. 10, 11,)“Whatsoever man there were to be expiated by the death of be of the house of Irael, or of the the guilty person himself, those of a strangers that sojourn amongst you, lighter kind were to be expiated by the that eateth any manner of blood, I blood of an animal. For example, will even set my face against that man let it be supposed that any one had that eateth blood, and will cut him reached such a height of impiety as off from amongst his people.” The to compose for his own use holy oil, next verse runs thus in the Hebrew:

, , ?

כי נפש הבשר בוס הוא ואני נתתיו or knowingly and advisedly to eat of לכם על המזבח לכפר על נפשתיכם fat or blood

,
his sins were to be atoned

for by his own death : on the con- 70' wÐJA RIN 077 ) thus translatrary, the same crimes committed ted, Anima enim omnis carnis est in santhrough ignorance and by accident, guine eumque vobis in aram dedi ad exwere to be expiated by the blood of piandas animas vestras. Sanguis enim a victim. Wherefore," says Dr. Out- est, qui pro animâ expiationem facit. ram, " what can be more evident than And the following seems to be the most that the punishment, which in more exact translation of it into English.

An Essay on the Nature and Design of Sacrifices under the Mosaic Law. 337 For the life of all flesh is in the blood, eminent degree offered to God: hence, and I have given it to you upon the also, the restrictions laid upon the altar to make atonement for your lives, eating of the flesh of sacrifices; and for it is the blood that maketh atone- to this intent we must attribute the ment for life.

ceremonies by which the altar, the In reference to this sentence, pro- priests' dresses, and all the furniture bably, the writer of the Epistle to the of the holy place were separated and Hebrews says, that (in the Mosaic made holy, as well as those annual law) without shedding of blood there ceremonies by which all these things was no remission of sins. See Magee's were sanctified afresh, or, (as the Dissertations, No. 38, and Outram Scriptures term it,) reconciled and De Sacr. lib. i. cap. xxi. $ 10. atoned. (Lev. xvi. 16.)

The meaning then given with much And whereas it is said that the life plausibility to this passage is as fol- of the animal is in the blood, this lows : No one shall eat any manner appears to be rather a physical than a of blood, for I have given the blood theological doctrine, and as far as it upon the altar, so as to imply that the has any moral effect or purport, seems life of the animal is given in lieu of well explained by Dr. Sykes, (on Sathe life of the offerer, which would crifices, p. 130,) when he says that otherwise be forfeited, and that by the law prohibiting the eating of blood that means he is saved from the evils was with design to keep men from all which might be the consequence of cruelty and immanity, by commanding the sins he has committed.

them to take away the lives of animals Now we may freely admit that the in the gentlest and mildest manner shedding of blood upon the altar was possible. a very solemn act, and had some such We require, therefore, a plainer religious meaning as made it highly proof than the mere juxta-position (in expedient that no common use should the verse quoted from Leviticus) of be made of blood, without in the least the life of the victim and the life of obliging ourselves to adopt the parti- the offerer, to be assured that the one cular theory which is here insisted on. has a vicarious relation to the other ; No doubt, when man appears before especially as there are Hebrew phrases his Maker, especially as one intending which would have placed the matter to confess himself guilty of certain beyond dispute; a most desirable obforbidden actions, he is filled with ject in a doctrine considered as so that fear and awe, which an apprehen- material to orthodoxy. Would it not sion of the results that would arise have been said, as the latter Rabbins from the displeasure of this Being have said, “ Let his blood be for my naturally occasions. He naturally blood; his soul of life for my life, or measures his ideas of the punishment in lieu of mine,” and rinnn 107.199 which may follow his crime, not so ) ,

Life for life, eye much from estimating the place which for eye”? &c. it takes in the scale of offences, as Nor will the later interpretations from contemplating the overwhelming given by the Jewish Doctors to an power of him who bears the sword of ancient form of confessions, stated in justice; and religious worship is to Outram, lib. i. cap. xxii. 9, be of him a very solemn and awful act. any great service in support of the

This is a feeling which, though by doctrine of vicarious punishinent, no means pleasing, is salutary, espe- though much relied on by Outram in cially to minds that are too gross and loc., by Dr. Magee, in No. 33, and sensual to be moved by other consi- by Dr. Pye Smith, in pp. 12 and 14 derations, and hence it was a part of of his Discourses on the Sacrifice of wisdom to defend the principal con- Christ, Lond. 1813. stituents of Jewish worship from being This ancient form is as follows: made common by profane uses.

Now, Lord, I have sinned, I have Hence the prohibition of imitating rebelled, I have committed iniquity, the composition of the holy oil and thus and thus have I done. But i perfume; and this was partly the rea- return penitently to thy presence, and son of the prohibition of eating blood be this my expiation"--; and fat-both of which were in an the remark of Dr. Outrain is, these

VOL. XVIII.

,נפש תחת נפש

2x

last words,“ let this (victim) be my tematic a way as might have been : expiation,” as the Jews tell us, sig- but who will undertake to concentrate nify, “Let this victim be substituted the scattered and uncertain rays which in my place, that the evil which I have are dispersed through seventy-four deserved may fall upon the head of Numbers into any luminous or wellthis victiin."

defined form? The Jews may tell us this; but the

(To be continued.) words, “Let this be iny expiation," express no more than this, Let this victim remove all displeasure of God

Homerton, from me, let this be my cleansing ; Sir,

June 14, 1823. leaving the real purport of Jewish sa I AM happy in being able to transcrifices for sin, still a subject to be ascertained from other circumstances. Repository, information calculated to

We shall use but one further argu- yield pleasure to your correspondent ment against the notion of the vicari- who lately made an Appeal in beous import of Jewish sacrifices; the half of the Christian Tract Society," one which Dr. Magee cites, as the and equally so to another of your corfifth and last of these objections of respondents, (No Eutopian,") whose which he volunteers a complete refu- remarks in the last number, (pp. 293, tation, though it would, it seems, 294,) though apparently at first sight, make no difference to his main argu- intended as a sarcasm on his benevoment, whether such objections were lent proposal, were obviously sugproved just or not.

gested by the most cordial approbaWe have already argued that the tion.-I hope “No Eutopian" will sacrifice of a victim is no emblem of soon have the gratification of seeing, vicarious punishment, because it is that the example set by the Bristol appointed for a variety of religious Fellowship Fund Society has so many occasions where confessions of sin imitators, that the “ list” of votes formed no part of the ceremony. Our “ in behalf of this institution” does present argument is the converse of occupy much room.” this, namely, that atonement for sin

G. S. being made in soine cases without any Grant by the Bristol Fellowship Fund aniınal sacrifices merely by an offering to The Christian Tract Society. of flour, by piacular sacrifices could never be implied the vicarious substi. “To the Secretary of The Christian Tract tution of a life.

Society. To this,” says Dr. Magee, “ the

· Bristol, ansiver is obvious, that although no “ Dear Sir, June 13, 1323. vicarious substitution of a life could “ I feel it a pleasure to hand you a be conceived, where life was not given resolution that was passed at our Felat all, yet from this it cannot follow, lowship Fund Dieeting on Wednesday that where a life was given, it might evening, viz. That three guineas be not admit of a vicarious import." The voted in aid of the Christian Tract question is not whether it might, but Society, and the tracts be presented whether it did actually, and it is no to the ladies and gentlemen conducting, thing else but giving up the question our Charity and Sunday Schools, for in dispute to concede, as Dr. Magee distribution, as they may deem proper, evidently does, that where a life was among the children. And also, that given in sacrifices, it might not have this resolution be recoininended to the any vicarious import.

attention of each succeeding comWe must be excused from entering mittee, as a means of usefulness, both now into that particular description to the Christian Tract Society and our of the four principal classes of Jewish Schools.' sacrifices, which we proposed to give The objects of the above resolution with reference to what can be collect- are very perceivable. Besides the ased respecting their distinct objects sistance afforded to the Christian Tract and purposes. What is material to Society, the conductors of our schools our purpose has already come under will have extra rewards to bestow, notice, though not, perhaps, in so sys- for attention, good conduct and fair

Remarks on two Doctrines of Dr. Priestley and Dr. S. Smith. 339 promises. And these tracts taken nence, which may serve to verify the home by the children, will, perhaps, charge I have here advanced. in most instances, be read by their In the first volume of Dr. Priestley's parents or some others of the family, Institutes of Natural and Revealed and thereby their interest and value Religion, (pp. 7, 3,) we meet with the being discovered, they will, it is hoped, following remarkable passage: after by degrees, lead to the cu ation of arguing that the Deity must have real religious principles among the exerted his creative power from all connexions of the children ; an object eternity, he observes,“ So little are as closely connected with our Fellow- our minds equal to these speculations, ship Funds and Unitarianism, as it is that though we all agree that an infiwith the Christian Tract Society. nite duration must have preceded the

“But these excellent tracts must be present moment, and that another well CIRCULATED to be read, esti- infinite duration must necessarily folmated and bring forth fruit.

low it; and though the former of these “ I trust that the appeals in behalf is continually receiving additions, of the Christian Tract Society will not which is, in our idea, the same thing be lost sight of by our Fellowship as its growing continually larger; and Funds and congregations having Sun- the latter is suffering as great diminuday and Charity Schools, or opportu- tion, which, in our idea, is the same nities of doing good, by the distribu. thing as its growing continually less ; tion of these truly valuable tracts. yet we are forced to acknowledge that

“ Yours, very respectfully, they both ever have been, and always “A Fellowship Fund MEMBER.” must be, exactly equal; neither of

them being at any time conceivably

greater or less than the other. Nay, Remarks on troo mysterious Doctrines

we cannot conceive how both these of Dr. Priestley and Dr. Southwood

eternities added together, can be Smith.

greater than either of them taken sepaSIR,

June 12, 1823. rately.”_"Is it possible,” the Trinither exempt from inconsistency, contradiction inore palpable than those and I have always considered the Uni- which are involved in the belief, that tarians as affording a striking exempli- the creation is coeval with its Maker; fication of this remark, in laying so that there is an eternity past which is much stress on their objection to the always increasing, and an eternity to Trinitarian doctrine, from its mystery. come which is always diminishing, and When they attempt to prove that it is yet that both of them ever have been, unfounded in the language of Scrip- and ever must be, precisely equal ; ture, they do no more than exercise and lastly, that these two eternities that right which unquestionably be- added together, will not amount to longs to every Christian ; and this, in

an one of them taken sepaa truth, is the only mode of reasoning rately?” Stronger language than this. on the subject which can be called has never, I believe, been used by the legitimate. But when they contend, most zealous advocate of the Trinity; as they are too apt to do, that the doc- but in the present day, it is satisfactrine ought to be rejected on account tory to observe, that the majority of of its mysterious nature, and its obvi- the more liberal divines belonging to ous impossibility, they evince the same the Established Church, rest degree of prejudice which they im- tented with the simple scriptural statepute to their adversaries, and act in ment of this doctrine, without attemptdirect contradiction to their own prac- ing a metaphysical explanation of what tice on other points of speculative is confessedly beyond the comprehentheology. Without recurring to the sion of finite understandings. It is inexplicable difficulties which meet us not the essence of the Deity which in every quarter, when we direct our ought, in my opinion, to excite our thoughts to the operations of the researches, só much as his attributes natural world, I shall content myself and character ; and he who by the with selecting two instances from Uni- united aid of reason and revelation can tarian writers of acknowledged emi- satisfactorily ascertain the latter, weed

I

more

con

« AnteriorContinua »