« PreviousContinue »
under the law, to redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons." Immediately a new train of thought struck him, "Christ was made under the law"-then he was not under it originally-for what end was he made under the law?-to redeem them that were under the law! Then they are not under the law now, but redeemed -there is, therefore, a way of redemption from the curse of the law, by which it is possible even I may be
Being thus enlightened, to see that God could save him, if he pleased, without debasing his own perfections, the bare possibility of salvation, in a way consistent with divine glory, made his heart glad indeed. He now began to search. the Scriptures for further discoveries of this glorious gospel, and having, through mercy, received the key to the mystery, he read the word of God as an unsealed book. The difficulty was now solved, which once tempted him to burn the Bible; he understood how the Almighty could forgive sin, and yet not clear the guilty. Soon after this his salvation began to appear not only possible but probable, and at length certain. This was in May, 1748. He was now convinced that salvation was by grace through faith; and he was enabled to see the mischievous tendency of those Arminian principles which had too long held him in bondage. He remarked long after, to a friend," Perhaps I should never have detested that system, had I not once drank deep into it, and felt its effects." Unable now any longer to bear the punishment of the ministry to which he had been accustomed, he used to travel five miles distant to another Presbyterian meeting, where the gospel was preached, and where he joined in communion with the people. The minister of this meeting was named Dryden.
About this time there was much talk in the country, where he lived, about some Anabaptists (as they were
called), who were preaching in the neighbourhood, and had opened a place for meeting at Hamsterley, about twelve miles off. Robert Hall's brother, Christopher, whom he had not seen for many years, was said to have joined the intruders; and this contributed not a little to increase his dislike of the Baptists, whom his Presbyterian connections did not, by any means, teach him to respect. Fired, therefore, with the ardour of controversial zeal, he, with two of his young friends, Rutherford and Peden, went to Hamsterley, to dispute the baptismal question with David Fernie, the Baptist minister. They were three to one, but, after some hours disputation, the young men found themselves more perplexed and entangled than they had expected. In a second interview, for which they prepared themselves with fresh arguments, they were again silenced, though not convinced. Sometime afterwards Robert Hall resolved to go alone to dispute the point with the Baptist minister, having first fortified himself by a course of reading in the Pædobaptist controversialists. On turning over these books, and in looking diligently into the subject, he did not neglect to seek for arguments wherewith to answer the objections which he anticipated would be brought against him by the Baptist minister; and thus it came to pass, that by further searching the Scriptures, he was at last fully convinced of the unsoundness of infant baptism. The next time, therefore, that he saw David Fernie was not to dispute with him, but to be baptized by him. Robert Hall was baptized, by immersion, Jan. 5, 1752, and was received into the little church, which had then been gathered by the recent labours of that minister. It is worthy of notice, that Robert Hall's associate disputants, Rutherford and Peden, were afterwards, the same year, baptized, and received into a church of the Baptist communion.
The church, conceiving that Robert
amongst men as motives leading to an act of adoption, as their reward, but supposes the person adopted was not a Son naturally, nor when first put into office. A son may become a servant, by undertaking an office, but I know not how an idea can be formed of office-capacity constituting sonship, as it does not beget likeness in nature as regeneration does, nor is it the cause or the effect of descent. But the very act of investing with officecapacity supposes prior personal identities, and if he be a Son as a person, he cannot be a son by his office, unless the office be the cause of personal existence; than which supposition, nothing can be more absurd. Moreover if Christ was a Son by office, there would be nothing marvellous in his obedience as a son; no more than teaching would be an admirable act, seeing the person was appointed to give instruction. If appointing, or sending, be equivalent with being a son, as respecting Christ, then Tho' he were a son, &c., might be read; Tho' he was appointed to act, yet he acted. Wonderful! He went, who was sent! He fought, tho' he was a general! And reigned notwithstanding his being a King!
III. He is not called Son of God MERELY on account of his humanity, for under that consideration he is the son of man; but (I think) he is called the son of God on account of his Divine nature, or infinite person, coming forth, or proceeding from the Father in union with humanity. For the constitution of his person as Mediator, or God-man, Immanuel, God with us, seems to bear such a resemblance to generation, and being begotten, as to support the terms, and yet to secure the glory, of his being properly eternal as a distinct person in Jehovah. The term Son, I scarce think, is intended to convey to us his native manner of existence, or subsistence in Deity, but what relates to us in respect to the covenant, or economy of grace, as the appellation Holy Ghost seems not to be given to
that blessed person to whom it be-> longs, because of his nature; for he is not more Holy than the Father and the Son, but with reference to what he is the author of to others, according to the design of Deity made known in the plan of the glorious gospel to wondering angels and selfruined men," &c.
Our readers will understand, that we do not pledge ourselves to Mr. Hall's sentiments. Those who speculate on this subject should bear in mind the words of our Lord, "No man knoweth the Son but the Father."
THE REV. WILLIAM DODSWORTH.
By the Record newspaper of last November, we are furnished with the following statement.
'The late Miss Hyndman intended to leave the sum of £70,000 towards the erection of new churches, but her intention was never carried into effect, so that the property legally reverted to her brother, the heir-at-law." That gentleman, however, scrupulously carried the wishes of his deceased sister into effect; and, by his desire, a trust was appointed for the purpose originally contemplated; the members of this trust are two ladies, the relatives and representatives of Miss. Hyndman, Mr. Dodsworth, and his nominee Lord Rayleigh."
Subsequent to the death of Miss Hyndman, the theological views of Mr. Dodsworth had undergone an important change, in other words he who was once well known as an evangelical Calvinistic Clergyman, has adopted the sentiments of the Oxford Tracts, which he now inculcates with the greatest diligence. Miss Hyndman never received those doctrines; and her nearest relations, including the trustees of the charity, are firmly opposed to Mr. Dodsworth's Puseyism. Mr. Dodsworth, however, is firmly determined that the trust shall be carried into effect for the furtherance of the Oxford doctrines, as may
be seen in the words of the Record newspaper.
1. After suitable negociation, it was resolved that a distinct church should be erected in Upper Chelsea out of the Hyndman fund.
2. "The rector, before he agreed to the arrangement, received the distinct pledge of Mr. Dodsworth, that no individual should be nominated as Incumbent of the proposed church, who should be obnoxious to him.
3. "Having received this pledge, in terms clear and indisputable, the rector gave his formal and legal consent to the erection of the church, and the annexation to it of a district, without which consent no erection could have taken place.
4. "Mr. Dodsworth, having now got the matter, as he conceives, into his own hands; insists on forcing upon the rector, and into his new church, an individual to whom the rector decidedly objects; and to whom not only the rector objects, but the two ladies acting as trustees -the relatives and representatives of Miss Hyndman. This individual is Mr. Dodsworth's own curate, a very forward scholar in the Puseyite errors.'
"We here pause for the present," says the Record, we shall be happy to learn if there is any inaccuracy in this statement of the matter; and if not, what excuse, we inquire, is there for Mr. Dodsworth's conduct?"
No answer has been given to this charge publicly preferred by the Record; so that the statement may be considered correct: and here therefore we leave the matter; but of Mr. Dodsworth himself, we have a few words more to say, as that gentleman is now, by assertion of the British Critic, named as one of the leaders of Puseyism, and is, by several publications, known to be in full accordance with the worst doctrines of the Oxford Tracts.
Mr. Dodsworth is of a Yorkshire family, which resided in Holderness,
in the East Riding, He was educated at Mr. Tate's school, Richmond, Yorkshire; entered Trinity College, Cambridge, in the year 1816; and took his Bachelor of Arts' degree, in the year 1819. The first year of his residence at Cambridge, was spent more in the indulgence of the youthful gaieties for which that University is noted; than in the pursuit of those studies to which a close application might perhaps have secured for Mr. Dodsworth a respectable place amongst scholars. But in the second year of his University career, a marked change took place in his character, accelerated by some trying circumstances, which it is not requisite here to mention. Mr. Dodsworth became decidedly, and seriously religious, breaking off from all his old acquaintance, with a firmness that proved the sincerity of his profession. Under
Mr. Simeon's ministry, he received excellent instructions in the truths of the gospel, and gave himself to the diligent study of the word of God. The views of the high church party he deliberately rejected, and rejected after long and diligent examination; for at that time the controversy was rife between the " orthodox" and " evangelical" sections of the clergy. We could state many curious circumstances, to show how Mr. Dodsworth at that time prospectively, as it were, opposed Puseyism; and we are firmly convinced, that few persons have so carefully compared the doctrines of the Reformation, with the doctrines of Popery, and that few have, after deliberate study, come to so firm a conclusion, that the Popish, the Laudean, the Non-Jurist, and the Puseyite errors are contrary to the word of God.
When Mr. Dodsworth left the University, and had received orders in the Church of England, he became curate of Mr. Beckett, the vicar of Gainsborough, in Lincolnshire; and from that curacy he was driven by the persecution of the Bishop of Lin
Hall was possessed of ministerial gifts, urged him to expound the Scriptures; to this he unwillingly consented, but finding his power in the work, he soon proceeded to regular preaching, and was called out by the church to public work, though not, as it would appear, by the ceremony of ordination.
In the year 1753, Mr. Hall was invited to take the ministerial office at Arnsby, in Leicestershire, his brother, Christopher, having about that time settled as a Baptist minister at Whitehaven. Mr. Hall accepted the invitation, and in Arnsby he continued as Baptist minister till the day of his death, which took place in the year 1791.
design to begin to plow: the Lord preserve man and beast, and grant a blessing!" and thus living by faith and not by sight, he was, through the kind mercies of his heavenly Father, preserved from famine, and never driven away from that which was dear to his heart, the task of preaching the gospel. "My family increased," said he, "having had fourteen children in all; but I found my heart so united to the people, that I never durst leave them, though I often thought I must. I trust the Lord was with us of a truth, and the 5th chapter of the 1st epistle of Peter was habitually impressed upon my mind. It appearing pretty clear to myself and my wife, that we were where God would have us to be, this sense of duty, and a willingness to live honestly, made us resolve, in the strength of the Lord, that we would not run into debt, let us live as hardly as we might which resolution he enabled us to keep."
The people amongst whom he was thus called to labour, were so poor that they never raised for him so much as £15 a year; and as he came amongst them with a family, it is easy to conceive how great must have been his difficulties. Robert Hall was, in the strictest sense of the word, a poor man; and, but for the unexpected assistance occasionally afforded him from persons to whom he could not have looked for help, he and his family must have sunk under the trials of extreme poverty. He made occasional entries in his memorandumbook of the unlooked-for relief which was extended to him in his moments
Mr. Hall was married in the year 1751 to Mary Catchaside, she died 1776, having suffered greatly both in body and mind before her death; but her last days were full of peace and joy in believing, and her death was triumphant. Mr. Hall published an account of his wife's spiritual conflicts and bodily sufferings, anonymously, under the title of " mercy manifested," a publication which is probably not now to be found. He seems to have written in a lively sense of the merciful dealings of his heavenly Father to himself, and his family. Mr. Ryland, junior, from whose funeral sermon on Mr. Robert Hall we chiefly derive these facts, says, “about this time I had sufficient intimacy with Mr. Hall to be able to assert that their affliction at that time was far beyond what any one can conceive; and yet his supports and consolations, and his faith and patience, were such as to astonish his friends."
of greatest anxiety. "Nov. 25, 1775, received to my great surprise from the Rev. Mr. N. ten pounds, and five from Mr. T. remitted in a bank bill of £15. This is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in my eyes. O to be found worthy of favours!" Jan. 31, 1776.. I received a letter to day from Mrs. T. by Mr. B. To my joy and surprize I am thereby informed, that Dr. F.'s lady put into her hands ten pounds for me. What shall I render to the Lord for this fresh instance of his goodness to me, an unprofitable, unholy, poor, mean creature: how good has my God been to me all my life long. Lord help me to praise, pray, and trust as long as I live." Feb. 22. 1777. This morning
In 1780, Mr. Hall entered into a second marriage with Mrs. Elizabeth Swan, an elderly widow, and a pious woman, in whose society he enjoyed
much conjugal happiness. The last seven years of his life his health declined, and he seems to have endured much bodily suffering. He died very suddenly after preaching on the Lord's day, in February 1791, leaving behind him his widow, and six children by his first wife. One of these children was Robert Hall of Leicester, who, we believe, always regarded his father as a person endowed with the highest order of intellect, and speaks of him in the following terms;-." He appeared to the greatest advantage upon subjects where the faculties of most men failed them; for the natural element of his mind was greatness" (Works, Vol. IV. p. 262-267), though the name of Robert Hall, senior, would now perhaps be scarcely known but for the high renown of his celebrated son.
The following fragment of Mr. Hall, of whose life we have here given a short sketch, has never been published.
I. "It appears to me that Divine personality is essential to deity, and if so, not the effect of any Divine act. For what is not so cannot properly be divine. What is not essential to deity is either the effect of Jehovah's will or his power. The product of his power cannot be eternal, otherwise creatures may be so, but once they were not. Acts of the Divine will may be eternal, yea must be so, otherwise there would be new volitions in God, which cannot be admitted, without the most dishonourable idea of the great Eternal. Therefore Mr. Hussey's sentiment, that God was, before his love, &c. &c., is shocking, for that would suppose him to have been once without volitions, and so no rational being-yea, no God. What are the effects of the Divine will different from his power? In answer to this question, it may fairly be asserted that persons are not. The will of God simply considered does not producé (separate from his power) any
being, existence, or person, but there are immanent acts, or acts in his mind respecting them; as love, choice, &c. &c. These are the effects of his will, or good pleasure, and are properly eternal, because it is impossible an infinite mind should ever be without those thoughts and volitions which he has revealed himself to be the subject of. The person of Christ could not be the product of the Divine will, and so eternal; because whatever is produced implies the exertion of power, and the effect of power once was not; otherwise the world might be eternal, and various absurdities would indeed necessarily follow the dishonourable idea.
II. To suppose Christ as a Divine person to be produced by the Father, destroys his eternity, and consequently his claim to Deity, and leads the mind to the Father as the fountain from whence a plurality of Divine persons proceeded. And if a fact, then Deity ought to be considered as originally, and therefore naturally subsisting in one person. And again if so, God in one person is the primary idea we ought to have of Jehovah which is contrary to revelation, and is the very soul of Sabellianism. To suppose Christ the effect of the divine will is to destroy the idea of his personality, and naturally supposes him not to have been the subject of that will of which he is the effect, which still leads back to the Father as the fountain not only of Divine personality but of Divine volition. For, according to that idea, the volitions of the son are the effects arising from the primary volitions of the Father. If Christ as the Son of God be a Divine person, which I most firmly believe, He was not a son by creation, nor by adoption, nor by regeneration, but in some sense far above what any creature is. I cannot think with Dr. Ridgely, &c., that he is a son by office. Acts of obedience, however agreeable, do not constitute relation. They may be considered