RARE THEOLOGICAL CRITICISM.
By J. H. W.
A PROFESSOR in a College, who writes D. D. to his name, attended a funeral at which the sermon was preached by a Seventh-day Adventist. The subject was appropriate—it was the resurrection of the dead. On the way to the cemetery, the Prof. took occasion to criticise the sermon, disputing in regard to the doctrine. This being successfully defended from the Scriptures, he turned to criticising the manner in which it was delivered, and insisted that the minister violated the principles of elocution! We have no doubt there are many ministers like this D. D., who would show off their personal graces, and sacrifice the spirit and truth of the gospel for scholastic forms, even at a funeral. And we regret that the religious taste of the age is so vitiated, that such preaching (if it is lawful to call it so) is popular. The poet asked,—
“Can flattery soothe the dull, cold ear of death?”
And we may ask, Can smooth speech, and artistic gestures, give consolation to the heart which sorrows at the death-bed of a dear friend? The very thought of criticising the elocutionary defects of a funeral discourse, while the Scripture hope is correctly expounded, is a mockery of the most sacred things with which we have to deal. We do not believe in clownishness, nor eccentricity in preachers. But these are more excusable, if the person is honestly ignorant, than “style” and foppery in the sacred desk in the person of one who has had the advantages of cultivation. Judged by the standard of the present day, John the Baptist would be considered a boor, and Paul would be set down as a rustic. If we may trust the testimony of Paul concerning himself, he was not up to the last-day standard in elocutionary style. He sacrificed the “form” for the “power.” He did not use “enticing words which man’s wisdom teaches,” but the words which were taught by the Holy Ghost. Common report was against him, at least among the more polite and genteel. “His bodily presence is weak, and his speech contemptible,” they said. And this plea was put forth by those who were forced to confess that his letters were “weighty and powerful.” He was mighty in the truth of God, but lacking in those graces of person which please the vain and the idle, and therefore they were inclined to resist the truth taught by him. There is a dignity in manhood when considered in regard to its relations to “the deep things of God”—to its great privileges and responsibilities, and the possibility of its attainments. But it is belittled by the action of many, whose advantages would lead us to expect better things of them. To us, there is painful evidence on every hand of the Scripture truth that man is a fallen being; that human nature is depraved and perverted. And we can almost excuse Prof. Darwin for projecting his theory, when we look upon the myriads who have little more reflection on the proprieties of life, who not much more realize the object and responsibilities of their existence, than the ancestry which he claims for them. As “evil communications corrupt good manners,” we need to watch, lest we be drawn from our steadfastness in the faith, to adopt the standard of the world, or of a world-loving church. One item of that which largely makes up the perils of the last days is, that they who have the form of godliness, will deny the power thereof. 2 Tim. 3:1–5. Truly, “the days are evil.” It is too late to trifle with the great things of God’s word. A lack of reverence, especially for the word of the Lord, is a prominent characteristic of the present age. Let our prayer be, “Open thou mine eyes, that I may behold wondrous things out of thy law.” Ps. 119:18. J. H. W.