Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

in Jerusalem.* Circumstances of this description, being wholly independent of Christ himself, are plainly incompatible with the theory of his being either an impostor or an enthusiast. He did not merely give himself out to be the predicted Messiah: he was declared to be such by others, and those neither of his own family nor at all connected with him, while he as yet was a child in arms.

We have now patiently gone through the evidence respecting the claims of Christ to the Messiahship of the Hebrews: and the difficulties, that attend upon the only two suppositions by which those claims might be invalidated are so great, that it may well be made a question, whether to believe him an impostor or an enthusiast does not shew an incomparably higher degree of credulity than to believe him a prophet really sent from God.

III. The character of the founder of Christianity having been thus fully vindicated, it might seem almost superfluous to discuss the character of his apostles and immediate followers for, if Christ himself cannot be pronounced either an impostor or an enthusiast except in despite of all evidence both moral and historical, it must clearly follow, that neither can any such imputation be reasonably cast upon those, who acted in obedience to his commands, and who propagated the identical system which he himself originally promulged. Yet, since the speculations of Infidelity respecting these earliest preachers of the Gospel are attended with nu

* Matt. 1-6. Luke ii. 25-32, 36-38.

merous difficulties, it may not be altogether useless to consider their character also.

1. The notion, I presume, which infidel writers, in consistence with their own principles, must entertain of the primitive missionaries of Christianity, is this: that they were a combination of artful impostors, tinged in a measure with Jewish obstinacy and enthusiasm (for the union of fraud and fanaticism is neither rare nor impossible;) who, availing themselves of the peculiar circumstances of the times, contrived to erect, upon the infatuated credulity of mankind, an ecclesiastical fabric, which through the labours of their industrious successors has since attained its present gigantic magnitude. These men, says Mr. Volney, were robbers and hypocrites: preaching simplicity, to inveigle confidence; humility the more easily to enslave; poverty in order to appropriate all riches to themselves; another world, the better to invade this. He speaks indeed, when he employs such language, of the whole collective body of the Christian clergy: but then he must be understood to include the apostles and the first preachers of the Gospel within that body; because, otherwise, his argument is palpably inconclusive. Let us grant to the utmost extent of his wishes, that the priesthood of the middle ages fully answered to his description; and let us further concede for the sake of argument, that the priesthood of the present day are not a whit better than their predecessors: what then? Unless Mr. Volney can prove that the apostles also were men of a like spirit, he will but little, at least with sober-minded and rational inquirers, have advanced his project of overturning Chris

tianity. Because certain unprincipled persons may have availed themselves of the general reception of the Gospel and the general veneration entertained for its divine founder, and may thence have contrived to erect upon these foundations a rich and powerful and thriving spiritual empire: are we therefore logically bound to conclude, that the apostles were robbers and hypocrites? The existence of artful and wicked men within the pale of the Christian Church cannot, by any legitimate process of reasoning with which I am acquainted, demonstrate the falsehood of Christianity itself. For this purpose, had Mr. Volney been a really honest and conscientious investigator, he would not have dealt in a vague indiscriminate abuse of the Christian clergy in general: but would have endeavoured to shew, if such a matter could be shewn, that his vituperation was correctly applicable to the apostles in particular. Could he have demonstrated on any secure grounds, that the apostles and the earliest preachers of the Gospel were robbers and hypocrites, preaching simplicity to irveigle confidence; humility, the more easily to enslave; poverty, in order to appropriate all riches to themselves another world, the better to invade this: could he, I say, have satisfactorily demonstrated any such position; he would also have demonstrated, that the apostles and first teachers, under their peculiar circumstance of being the original promulgators of a religious system, were certainly a band of interested impostors. But, unless this can be done, in effect nothing is done. The misconduct of their successors cannot prove the apostles to be impostors and, unless the apos

s;

tles can be proved to be impostors, Christianity cannot be proved to be a fable. If therefore Mr. Volney wishes to include in his description the whole body of the Christian priesthood, from the apostles down to the present time; a matter, clearly necessary to the conclusiveness of his argument: he must give us something more than his own bare assertion, that he has accurately depicted the character of the apostles. And, on the other hand, if he does not wish to include the apostles in his description of the Christian priesthood: then it is hard to comprehend, how he has proved the apostles to be impostors and thence consequentially the Gospel to be a cheat. But Mr. Volney is not very remarkable for close reasoning his zeal in the cause of irreligion is apt to outrun his judgment.

2. Let us however examine the notion, professedly entertained by infidels, that the primitive missionaries of Christianity were a knot of impostors, whose object was to delude mankind into the belief that they were a company of divinely commissioned teachers.

(1.) Now we readily grant, that, during the life-time of their master, the apostles entertained the ambitious hope, common to them with the rest of their countrymen, that he was about to establish a temporal sovereignty in which his tried adherents might expect the highest places of dignity and emolument. Christ indeed repeatedly told them, what they might expect in his service; contempt, hatred, bonds, imprisonment, spoliation, persecution, death: but we all know the mode, in which a sanguine temper is wont to operate. It is not impossible, that

from an unwillingness to be disturbed in the midst of a golden dream, they might turn a deaf ear to all such declarations. Probably they might view them, as somewhat exaggerated: probably they might deem them mere trials of their steadfastness and fidelity, propounded in words, but never meant to be carried into effect: probably they might esteem them, as simply setting forth those preliminary hardships and labours, which they who gird themselves up to a mighty enterprize must contentedly endure in the road to victory. Human nature is ever in→ genious, in excogitating agreeable solutions of what in the letter it dislikes to hear. Hence it is not at all impossible, that some such explanatious might be sought after, as would leave the disciples of Christ in possession of a blissful dream of worldly aggrandizement. On this principle it was perhaps, that, even so late as immediately before the last journey to Jerusalem, Peter, in the name of his fellows, undertook, as it were, to make terms with his master. Behold, said that apostle, magnifying his deserts and apparently expecting an ample temporal reward: Behold, we have forsaken all, and followed thee: what shall we have therefore? To this question the answer of Jesus was, that they should indeed be promoted to the highest dignities in his kingdom, that they should be abundantly remunerated for every sacrifice; but that they must look for these rewards only in a future and eternal world. Verily I say unto you, that ye, which have followed me, in the regeneration, when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve

« AnteriorContinuar »