On this page
-
Text (1)
-
Untitled Article
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
Untitled Article
good of mankind lire her only objects in writing . Mrs . H . appeal to me completely to mistake ot * r Lard ' s design in what he says of the eider brother in * m $ parable ; and to have been led into that mistake by inattention to the circumstances which occasioned his delivering" the thre 6 parables contained in chap . xv . of Luke . We are told , vers . j 2 " Then drew near unto him all
the publicans and sinners for to hear him . And the Pharisees and Scribes murmured , saying , This man receiveth sinners , and eateth with them . " In consequence of this , our Lord delivered the parables which follow ; evidently with the design of justifying his own conduct , and of reproving the Pharisees and Scribes for objecting to his
receiving sinners and eating with them . This being his design , it seems natural to think , that , in the person of the elder brother , he meant to expose their unreasonable prejudices , want of liberal and benevolent feeling , inattention to the ignorant , and those who most needed reformation , and the
contempt they shewed to all whom they called sinners . As the Jews called all men sinners , who were not of their nation , or proselytes to their religion , what is there unnatural in the supposition , that Jesus , by the elder and
younger sons in the parable , meant to represent the Jews and the Gentiles ? Mrs . H . takes for granted that what the elder brother said of himself was perfectly correct * that he " had never departed from the path of rectitude , never transgressed his father ' s commandment ; " and asks , " If , as
is most apparent , our great Teacher intends to represent the Almighty under the character of the father in the parable , can the son , who ' never at any time transgressed his commandment / be other than the most
excellent of human beings ? " But , I ask , h the elder brother * as described by our Lord , the most excellent of human beings ? Does not his conduct towards his * poor lost brother , stand in opposition to that of our
Lord , ( who Was in reality the most excell ent of hunian beings , ) towards lost sinners ; and strikingly resemble that of the Pharisees which Jesus cetujured ? . Instead o £ giving him credit ^ P ^ fe ^' iieiitMntocSMl iinifonn obe-WM * - 'ofe , -ti 1 fe > rf ^ gjcavati of hk
Untitled Article
own assertion , is it not more natural to think he was orie of those whonr our Lor& addressed in another parable , who trusted in themselves that they wefe ri | rht& > U 8 , and despised others ? His being angry at the conduct of his father , and the language he used to him , can never be reconciled with filial piety ; which is the germ of all other virtues . Is it possible for " the most excellent of human beings' * to upbraid a go 6 d father , and charge him with injustice , even to his face * His assertion , that his father had never given him even a kid , was evidently false ; for in ver . 12 , we are told that he had his portion at the same time with his brother . Towards
his brother he shewed himself unfeeling , and destitute of affection ; for he ought to have remembered he was his brother , however he had acted ; and , had he not been dead to the
best feelings of our nature , the return of his brother must have given him pleasure , instead of his anger being excited at his father ' s receiving him with kindness . I see not how
all our Lord says of him can be taken into view , without his appearing unamiable and selfish ; and selfishness is the root of every vice . Could Jesus exhibit the elder brother as an
approved character , without seeming to justify the Pharisees in their objections to his own conduct ? I perfectly agree with Mrs . H . as to the bad moral tendency of representing those who have been abandoned to
every vice , when brought to repentance , as more precious in the sight of the benevolent Father of all , than those who have always been virtuous ; but this appears to me irrelevant to the design of our Lord ' s parable . The question is , whether the truly
penitent sinner be not more acceptable in the sight of God , than the self-righteous Pharisee , who , probably , appears outwardly righteous only because he has notv been exposed to powerful temptations , and who , with all his boasted righteousness , is
censorious , uncharitable ,, selfish , and in * wardly corrupt : and I leave it to Mrs * H . and the readers , to consider whether such were ; not the cba-ractere which our Lord meant to expose ajid reprove in the parable , while he vindicated his own conduct ; in receiving einnera and eatii ^ i vvith them .
Untitled Article
Mr ' . tPAgkt < m his Trdct on the . Prddigal S&n . 662
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Oct. 2, 1823, page 567, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct1789/page/7/
-