Imatges de pàgina
PDF
EPUB

SERMON V1.

SERMONS ON REVELATION.

SERMON IV.

MODES OF TEACHING THEOLOGY AND MORALS ADOPTED BY THE ANCIENT PHILOSOPHERS INCAPABLE OF PRODUCING REFORMATION.

1 COR. III. 20.

"The Lord knoweth the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain."

IN the three preceding discourses I have attempted to show, that the reason of man is incapable of devising a religion which will render him acceptable to God. This general proposition I endeavoured to support, by showing that mankind have never been able to discover satisfactorily a defensible scheme of duty, of worship, or of expiation; that their knowledge of these great subjects is extremely limited; that their arguments are miserably feeble; and that their conclusions, at the best, are totally uncertain. In the last discourse I attempted to prove, that the philosophers, men to whom all those who, in modern times, have asserted the sufficiency of human reason for these purposes, have regularly recurred for the support of their favourite opinions, have, instead of making the religious system which they found in the world better, actually made it

worse.

In the present discourse it is my intention to show, that the

manner in which their philosophy was taught was vain and useless, and could never become the means of accomplishing a reformation among mankind. To this truth the text immediately conducts us. "The Lord," says St. Paul, "knoweth "the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain." This passage is quoted from the 94th Psalm, and the 11th verse. "The "Lord knoweth the thoughts of man, that they are vanity;" that is," the thoughts of all men, the wisest as well as the "weakest." The passage is, therefore, quoted with sufficient exactness, without supposing any alteration in the copy. The word, rendered thoughts in the text, is daλoyous; the literal English of which is reasonings. Correctly expressed, therefore, the declaration of the text will be, "The Lord "knoweth the reasonings of the wise, that they are vain.” The instructions which the philosophers of Greece and Rome, the Zool here intended by the Apostle, communicated to mankind, were chiefly given in the form of reasonings. Discourses exhibited in this form were those of which they especially boasted, and on which they supremely relied for the dissemination of their opinions and establishment of their fame.

With the manner in which the doctrines of these philosophers were communicated, I shall unite, in my observations, all the circumstances of material importance which attended these philosophical discussions. The discussions themselves, and the circumstances immediately connected with them, were so intimately interwoven, that they came to the minds of all who received them as one combined object, and were inseparably united as a single cause of whatever effects they produced on the mind.

With these observations premised, I assert, from the text, the following doctrine:

That the mode of teaching theology and morals adopted by the ancient Philosophers, involved in itself a necessary and total inefficacy for producing a reformation among mankind.

Moral and religious instructions, whether doctrines or precepts, are capable of being taught in two great and entirely distinct methods; viz. as laws and philosophy. Whenever they are communicated in the form of laws, binding the consciences and

the conduct of men, it is obvious that they can be communicated, with either propriety or effect, only by a lawgiver, who has a right to prescribe as well as to teach. This lawgiver can be no other than God; and the mode of teaching cannot be adopted in any code of instruction, except a revelation. This truth has been every where felt and acknowledged. Accordingly, al instructors, vested, or professing to be vested, with authority merely human, have taught in the latter of these methods, or that of philosophy; sufficient, perhaps, to influence with all the necessary advantage the ordinary and prudential pursuits of mankind, but absolutely vain, as may appear from the following considerations, in those concerns which involve our duty and salvation.

I. Philosophy teaches its doctrines universally as parts of a system.

This method seems to be involved in the very nature of philosophical teaching. As that which is to be taught is rarely evident by itself, it must, of course, be supported by evidence derived from other sources. The evidence by which any doctrine is supported in the mode of philosophical instruction, is usually dependent for its strength, in a great measure at least, on the connection of that doctrine with others. In order to evince the truth of the respective parts, their connection must almost always be exhibited, so that they may seem to be parts of one whole, and necessary to each other. Hence the whole, of which the supposed doctrines are parts, must be displayed. In other words, a scheme, a system of the science to which these doctrines belong, must be formed by the teacher, and unfolded to his disciples. So generally, and so much of course is this the fact, that a work, formed in such a manner, is appropriately called a philosophical work. If the course here specified be not pursued, a great part of the evidence which supports the individual doctrines, must be lost. Most of them will, of consequence, be unsupported, and will, therefore, be taught in vain. In this manner of teaching, (the best I acknowledge, which mankind are able to adopt,) there are two

very important defects, so far, at least, as it has hitherto existed.

In the first place, The system will, almost of course, be too complex to be thoroughly understood and comprehended by the teacher himself. Some of the parts he may understand, and unfold clearly; of others he will form such inadequate conceptions, and will convey such indistinct views of them in his instructions, as will be utterly unsatisfactory to his most ingenious and learned readers. The human faculties are unequal to the exact comprehension of any very complicated scheme of truth. In such a scheme there will always be some avenues to mistake, some things not clearly seen, and others absolutely unseen. Ignorance and misapprehension concerning these will obscure and perplex the rest, and diffuse a general uncertainty over the whole. Hence, professed philosophers will not accord with each other, as we know they never have done,— nor unite in any single scheme of doctrine.

-

But in subjects of such amazing importance as those which are involved in a system of religion, doubt is always distressing, and not unfrequently fatal. Satisfaction is here felt by the soul to be indispensable; and, when it cannot be found, man is ever prone either to lie down in sloth and indifference, or to become sceptical, or to yield himself up as a victim to despair. Each of these courses is ruinous; and all naturally spring out of the moral systems of philosophy.

Secondly, The great body of mankind are unable to think systematically at all; that is, in such a manner, as to perceive the evidence arising from the connection of the parts, and from their combination in a whole. Unlearned and ignorant men think chiefly in single and detached propositions, not in connected chains and schemes of thought. Many men form scarcely any general propositions, and are, by immovable habits, confined entirely to particulars. But systems are composed only of general propositions. How can they be received by such men; men who can scarcely understand even a little part of them, and cannot perceive the nature of that connection between the parts, on which all in a great measure depend for the evidence of their truth or probability? To the great body

of mankind even the plainest and simplest system must be either entirely or chiefly useless, because they can never comprehend it; and because it must, therefore, be regarded with doubt by such minds as theirs. But in a case of such magnitude, a case, where the present and future welfare of the soul is at hazard,-doubtful precepts and doctrines can have no efficacious or salutary influence. No precept which is not believed will be obeyed. For this, as one reason, the instructions of philosophy never governed the common people at all. The traditionary doctrines and precepts of their ancestors, unattended with any other evidence than the authority of long-continued custom, controlled the worship and the moral conduct of each successive generation, while the dogmas of philosophers were treated only with listlessness or contempt.

This is an inherent and inseparable defect in philosophical teaching; and will always exist so long as philosophers themselves are so imperfect, and so long as the great body of mankind are labourers and not philosophers. Even those instructions which are true, and those precepts which are just, will have, and ever have had, little or no influence on mankind, when taught in this manner only. Neither the books of the ancient philosophers, nor those of modern infidels, have had any other influence on the common people, beside encouraging them to a greater degree of licentiousness than they would otherwise have dared to indulge.

II. Philosophers have never been able to determine what moral and religious truths were fundamental.

By fundamental truths, I mean such as are absolutely necessary to be obeyed; or, in other words, such as, being obeyed, are followed by the divine acceptance; and such as, being disobeyed, are followed, of course, by our condemnation.

To understand all moral truths is evidently beyond the power of man. The utmost which we can do in the most favourable circumstances, or with the aid of revelation itself, is to fasten upon certain primary ones,-a few,-of all possible importance, and adhere to them, as being sufficient to ensure our salvation. This peculiarity is all that can be done by the great body

« AnteriorContinua »