« AnteriorContinuar »
I AM THAT I AM: And he said, thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you. Who was it that spoke to Moses ? or what notion are we to form of that Being, who pronounced these words, I AM THAT I AM? It is certain that it was the Angel of the Lord, that appeared to Moses in the bush, and from thence pronounced those words. It was the Angel who said I am the God of thy father;
I AM THATI AM. But the Angel of the Lord God is not the Lord God, whose Angel he is. The solution of the difficulty hence arising, is, as he says, very obvious and clear. For the folid and inconteftible foundation of the solution is laid by our Lord himself, in John v. 37. And
the father himself, who hath sent ine, hath born witness of 6 me.
Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape'--that is, the Lord God never spake or appeared in perfon, but always by a proxy, nuncius, or messenger, who represented him, and therefore spake in his name and authority, saying, I am God all sufficient, I am the God of Abraham, I AM THAT I AM. Which words were pronounced by an Angel, but are true not of the Angel, but of God, whom he represented, and upon whose errand he came. So a Herald reads a proclamation in the King's name and words, as if the King himself were speaking,
It hath been commonly supposed, that Jesus Christ, before his incarnation, was the Angel or Messenger that appeared in the Shechinah, and spake to the Patriarchs, to Mofes, and the Prophets, and is called the Angel of his presence, Ifai. Ixjii. 9. In all their affiction he was afflicted, and the Angel of his presence saved them.- To this, Dr. Taylor ob. serves, it may be objected, that our Lord in this case will be supposed to publish the law, and to preside over the Jewish Difpenfation, as well as over the Gospel ; which scems to be quite inconsistent with John i. 17. The law was given by Mofes, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ; and iieb. i. 1, 2, ii. 2. But to obviate these objections, he inquires—“ May we not distinguilh between the Logos, as a Proxy of Dcity, or as personating the glorious Majesty of God in the Shechinah, and in that capacity by the holy Spirit, inspiring the Prophets, and presiding over the Angels, at the giving of the law, and the same Logos acting and speaking to us, in his incarnate state, in the capacity of a Prophet? In the former capacity, he may be considered in relation to God, as personating God, or as in the form of God, whose Agent
he was under every dispensation which God erected'; and therefore as doing nothing in his own person. For thus his person would coincide with that of the fupreme God, and is not to be considered as different from him, but as acting in his name and authority. In the latter capacity he may be considered in relation to U3, and to our salvation by the gospel ; for the accomplishment of which, he stooped so far as to take upon him our nature, and not as personating God, but in quality of a Prophet fent from God, to publish among us, in his own person and name, the promise of eternal fife."
We cannot conclude without hinting, that the Author's Key to the apostolic writings, published some years since, may afford much additional light and improvement to such Enquirers as desire a thorough acquaintance with this excellent scheme of Scripture Divinity.
Of this learned Writer's other works we have made frequent mention in our Review ; particularly of his valuable Hebrew Concordance: for which see Review, vol. XV. p. 22. and vol. XVI. p. 235,
Emilius and Soplia: Or, a new System of Education. Br
Mr. Rouffeau. Translated for Becket, &c. Continued from Page 217
UR ingenious Author, having divided his work into
five parts, agrecable to the several periods by which he distinguishes the progress of his Pupil's Education, confines himself, in his first book, chiefly to what relates to the management of children till they are able to talk and run about. Before a child arrives at this term, he is little better, says Mr. Rousseau, than he was in the womb of his inother, without sentiments or ideas, and almost without sensations.
Vivit, et est vitæ nefcius ipfe fuæ. 'The observations contained in this part of the work, are, of course, mostly physical : indeed, our Tutor thinks it not enough to take charge of his Pupil at the usual time when children are dismifled from the Nursery;, as the manner of treating them, even in their earliest infancy, appears to him of the highest importance to their future welfare. Agreeable to slvis notion, he fets out with remarking the mistaken mcthous of Education in general; and the necessity of improve
ment. He then proceeds to the means of such improvement, by earnestly recommending to parents a strict discharge of that indispensible duty of nursing and educating their own children.
“ A father, fays he, in begetting and providing sustenance for his offspring, hath in that discharged but a third part of his obligations. He owes a Being to his species, social Bea ings to Society, and Citizens to the State. Every man, who is capable of paying this triple debt, and refuses, is, in that respect, criminal, and, perhaps, is more fo when he pays it by halves. He who is incapable of performing the duties of a father, has no right to be one. Neither poverty nor business, nor personal importance, can dispense with parents nursing and educating their children. Readers, you may believe me, continues he, when I take upon me to assure every pa. rent who is endued with sensibility, and neglects these sacred obligations, that he will long live to repent it in the bitterness of his sorrow, and never be comforted.”
Our Author is, perhaps, too severe on the fair sex, in the article of suckling their children; and has suffered his zeal for the human species in general, to carry him strange (and we hope unwarrantable) lengths against the most amiable part of it. He may be thought, however, to make them Some amends, by the great influence which, he conceives, a change in their behaviour will have over the present depravity of manners.
“ Should mothers, says he, again condescend to nurse their children, manners would form theinselves, the sentiments of nature would revive in our hearts; the State would be repeopled; this principal point, this alone would re-unite every thing. A tafte for the charms of a domestic life, is the best antidote against corruption of manners. The noise and bustle of children, which is generally thought troublesome, become hence agreeable; it is thefe that render parents more necessary, more dear, to each other, and strengthen the ties of conjugal affection. When a family is all lively and animated, domestic concerns afford the most delightful occupation to a woman, and the most agreeable amusement to a man. Hence, from the correction of this one abuse, will presently result a general reformation; nature will soon re-assume all its rights. Let wives but once again become mothers, and the men will presently again become fathers and husbands."
With regard to the cloathing, dict, exercise, and medical treatment of infants, many judicious rules are here laid down, and methods prescribed, for the use of mothers and nurses, on these heads. As to the first, our Author decries swaddling clothes, with tight ligaments and bandages of all kinds; recommending a thin, loose dress, in all seasons. With respect to diet, he advises chiefly milk-meats, and those prepared with the greatest simplicity. Under the article of Exercise, we may rank the many pertinent observations, and sensible instructions, occasionally interspersed throughout this book, and tending to fortify the constitution, and perfect the organs of children. But we have the less need to particularize these, as many of them are better calculated for a milder climate, and as others are well known, and already pretty generally adopted in this island. As to Medicines, Mr. Rousseau would have few, or none, administered in almost any
case. 6. The sagacious Mr. Locke, says he, who had spent most of his life in the study of medicine, earnestly advises us never to give children physic by way of precaution, or for Night indispositions. I will go farther, and declare, as I never call in the Physician for myself, so I will never trouble him on account of Emilius; unless, indeed, his life be in imminent danger: and then the Doctor cannot do more than kill him. I know very well the Physician will not fail to take advantage of that delay. If the child dies, he was called in too late; had he been sent for sooner- if he recovers, it is then the Physcian that saved him. Be it so. I am content the Doctor Mould triumph, on condition he is never sent for till the patient be at the last extremity."
Nor is our Author less severe on the art itself than on its Professors. He affirms Physic to be more destructive to mankind than all the evils it pretends to cure.
" I know not, continues he, for my part, of what malady we are cured by the Physicians; but I know many fatal ones which they infict upon us ; such are cowardice, pufillanimity, credulity, and the fear of death: if they cure the body of pain, they deprive the soul of fortitude. What end doth it answer to fociety, that they keep a parcel of rotten carcases on their legs?' It is men the community wants, and those we never sce come out of their hands.
“ It is, however, the present mode to take physic; and it should be so. It is a pretty amusement for idle people that have nothing to do, and not knowing how to bestow their time otherwise, throw it away in self-preservation. Had they
been so unfortunate as to have been born immortal, they would have been the most miserable of Beings. A life, which they would not be under the continual apprehensions of lofing, would be to them of no value. Physicians pay their court to such persons, by frightening them, and affording them daily the only pleasure they are susceptible of; that of hearing they are in danger, and yet not quite dead.
“ I have no design to enlarge here on the futility of phyfic; my present purpose being only to consider it in a moral light. I cannot, however, forbcar observing, that mankind use the same fophistry, in regard to the use of medicine, as they do with respect to their search after truth. They fupposé always, that when a Physician treats a Patient who recovers, he has cured him; and that when they have gone through a disquisition concerning the truth, they have found it. They do not see that we ought to put in the balance against one cure effected by phyfic, the deaths of an hundred Patients it has killed; or that we should oppose to the utility of one boasted truth, the mischief of a thousand errors fallen into by making the discovery. The science which enlightens, and the physic that cures, are doubtless very useful : but the pretended science that milleads, and the physic that kills, are as certainly destructive. Teach us therefore to distinguish between them. This is precisely the point in question. Could we teach our vain curiosity not to thirst after informa-, tion, we should never be the dupes of falfhood; could we be satisfied to bear the maladies to wliich nature denies a cure, we should never die by the hands of the Physician. Self-dcnial in these two instances is prudent; men would be evi-, dently gainers by fuch abftinence and submission. I do not pretend to deny that phyfic may be useful to some few particular persons, but I affirm it to be destructive to the human race in general."
The tender parent, anxious for the welfare of a beloved child, will, no doubt, be curious to know what step our Author would advise to be taken, instead of calling in the Physician. We thall; therefore, insert the method he propoles, tho' we imagine there are few fond mothers who will so far assent to its expediency, as to put it in practice.
“ For want of knowing the way to get cured, a child should learn to know how to be fick; this art will supply the want of the other, and often succeed a great deal better : this is one of the arts of nature. When a brute animal is