130

ST. MARY'S IN THE LAST CENTURY.

The former added persecution to error; the latter conduct themselves with mildness and write like gentlemen. The one class excited indignation; the other calls forth pity and regret, but demands an honest exposure.

The pulpit of St. Mary's, Oxford was in the last century continually occupied by welcome impugners of the leading doctrines of the Reformation, such as, if they preached now, would quickly drive away the majority of the audience from any church whatever. As an example of this school of divinity, we may take a sermon of the Rev. John Allen, vice-principal of St. Mary Magdalen Hall, preached on Sunday, July 19, 1761, which was so palatable to his hearers, that the vicechancellor requested its publication. It is moreover particularly suited to these pages, since it called forth a pamphlet in reply from the pen of Mr. Richard Hill, a copy of which is still in existence, with the manuscript corrections of the author and his brother Rowland. The sermon was entitled "No acceptance with God by Faith only ;" and the text was James ii. 14-Can faith save him? This learned divine did not then know the way to answer the common question put to every bible student, "How do you reconcile St. Paul and St. James?" The sermon began thus: "One design of this epistle is to confute a notion, which some mistaken converts to Christianity had unhappily imbibed from St. Paul's doctrine concerning faith, as if he had taught that that, and that alone, would convert and justify the disciples of Jesus." Mr. Richard Hill, without noticing the confusion of mind evident in this passage, simply observes: "If by this, Mr. Allen means to assert that the apostle James is confuting that monstrous and diabolical doctrine, that a mere speculative assent to the gospel truths,-that is, a dead unoperative faith,

SERMON OF THE REV. J. ALLEN.

131

can justify, he is most certainly in the right, nor can we in too strong terms bear testimony against so dangerous a delusion; but if he would insinuate, as plainly appears to be the case, that a lively operative faith, a faith which is the gift of God, and the work of his Spirit in the heart,—cannot justify, then he evidently makes the two apostles contradict each other and St. James, instead of confuting a mistaken notion, will be found to be confuting the assertions of his brother Paul." This was indeed the main subject of the disputes of the day; and the question was so well handled in a visitation sermon preached at the time, by Mr. Hartley, rector of Winnick, in Northamptonshire, that I cannot refrain from introducing here a passage from it, quoted by Mr. Hill. "If indeed," says he,

no more was meant by faith, than a mere historical faith, a bare assent of the mind to the credibility of things, in the language of the schools, as far forth as credible; a belief of something extorted by dint of argument, rising no higher than moral evidence can force it, and sinking again under the objections of every subtle disputant; if this be all that is meant by gospel faith, it would indeed be matter of wonder if such a faith could justify if this were a saving faith, I should think the very devils capable of salvation: but surely we do not mean that this is the faith of which St. Paul speaks so many great and glorious things; that faith by which the saints of old subdued kingdoms, wrought righteousness, obtained promises, stopped the mouths of lions, and did so many other marvellous works. It cannot be said, that such is the faith defined by the same apostle, to be the substance of things hoped for, evidence of things not seen; putting us into a kind of present possession of the promises, and setting divine truths before the mind.

132

JUSTIFICATION BY FAITH.

in all the light and power of demonstration: it cannot, I am sure, with any truth or propriety be so said of it. The faith then that we contend for as truly Christian and justifying, does not arise from historical evidence only; much less does it consist in forced speculations, or the uncertain conclusions of human reason; but is of higher extraction, even the gift of God; it is a seed of the divine life in the soul, growing up in a gradual approach towards perfection, and bringing forth the fruits of the Spirit; a faith working by love, producing obedience to all God's commands, and abounding in good works, according to that measure of abilities which God hath given us it is a power from on high, at once enlightening and converting the soul; it is that victory whereby we overcome the world and to sum up all in this emphatical conclusion, it is hereby that Christ becomes Immanuel, or God with us, and is made unto us wisdom and righteousness, and sanctification and redemption." When our Church asserts that we are justified by faith, no enlightened person conceives that thereby is meant that the grace of faith itself justifies in the way of meritorious cause. It is only the instrumental cause; the hand by which we receive Christ, whose atonement is the sole cause of our justification. Thus Archbishop Usher observes: "Faith is an instrument whereby my justification is wrought, an instrument whereby Christ is received. We must know that in point of receiving we all live on God's alms; all our justification is his gift, and faith is that palsy hand which receives all our comfort."

1

But the sermon which the vice-chancellor of Oxford desired to have printed, denied faith to be the instrumental cause, or indeed any cause at all of our justifica

1 See Article XI.

MR. HILL'S REPLY TO MR. ALLEN.

133

tion; and it may be taken as a pretty fair specimen of the favorite theology of his days. Mr. Richard Hill, however, shrewdly observes of the Oxford logician, " I should be glad to know how he could prove that to be no cause, without which an effect cannot be produced?" Mr. Allen's idea was, that works "such as we have covenanted to perform under this last and best dispensation, such as proceed from faith in Christ," were the causes of our justification. To this Mr. Hill replied in the words of Bishop Beveridge, taken from his Private Thoughts: It is matter of admiration to me how any one that pretends to the use of his reason, can imagine that he should be accepted before God, for what comes from himself for how is it possible that I should be justified by good works, when I can do no good work at all before I be first justified? My works cannot be accepted as good, till my person be so; nor can my person be accepted by God, till first engrafted into Christ; before which engrafting into the true Vine, it is impossible I should bring forth good fruit." But what was still more extraordinary, these logical divines, after having stated their views of the necessity of works to justify, roundly asserted that justification took place in baptism, like some modern Oxonians, as will be noticed presently. Mr. Hill pointedly observes on this notion, "In order to make him (Mr. Allen) consistent with himself, we must suppose him an anabaptist, or else that he would have all infants do good works before they are baptized."

One chief objection made by this school of preachers to the doctrine of justification by faith, was, that it excluded the necessity of good works. But how well did the learned Hooker observe: "It is a childish cavil our adversaries so greatly please themselves with, exclaiming that we tread all Christian virtues under our feet, be

cause we teach that faith alone justifieth. Whereas by this speech, we never meant to exclude either hope or charity from being always joined as inseparable mates with faith in the man that is justified; or works from being added as necessary duties required of every justified man, but to shew that faith is the only hand that putteth on Christ to justification; and Christ the only garment which, being so put on, covereth the shame of our defiled natures, hideth the imperfection of our works, and preserveth us blameless in the sight of God."

It is not necessary to enlarge on a doctrine so often unanswerably expounded, and which is now so widely diffused and accepted, further than to bring into notice historically, the unmerited animosity to which it subjected its pious defenders in the days of the Oxford students, and for some time subsequent to their expulsion. To shew how extremely in the dark these adversaries of Methodism, as they called it, were, we have only to quote the extraordinary misrepresentation of its leading tenet" from the sermon of Mr. Allen, sanctioned by the vice-chancellor of Oxford. "It is," says he," the leading tenet of modern enthusiasm, that any one by suddenly believing that Jesus Christ shed his blood for his sins is instantaneously saved." It was time indeed that they should be reminded that they were first distorting, and then condemning the articles of their own Church and the most prominent doctrines of the Reformation.

The period is past for the renewal of such attacks upon evangelical teachers; but there is now in active. operation the same anti-reformation principle, only in a form more likely to be attractive in this day of inquiry, than the cold morality of the preceding age of dry logic and dull ethics. To these specious reasonings we must