Sydney Smith's Spiritual Character [pp. 291-304]

Sydney Smith7's Spiritual Character.
was that he was thus early called to such
a situation, and how it prepared him for
extensive usefulness in a higher sphere.
Did Sydney Smith feel and act thus? Did
he, according to his ordination vow, regard his office as one of high responsibility? He found his parishioners ignorant,
unrefined, and miserable. Did he, feeling the value of their souls, strive to
enlighten, and refine, and make them
happy? Did he instruct the illiterate, reprove the wicked, exhort the negligent,
alarm the presumptuous, strengthen the
weak, visit the sick, comfort the afflicted,
and reclaim the wandering? If he had
acted thus, "the wilderness," in a moral
sense, "would have been glad, and the
desert would have rejoiced, and blossomed
as the rose." But instead of this, he complained of want of society, of books, of
food, of everything; and, at the end of
two years, resigned his living. After
this, he departed with the eldest son of
the squire to whom he was tutor, and engaged to go with him to the University of
Weimar, in Saxony; but in consequence
of the disturbances in Germany, occasioned by the war, he went to Edinburgh.
He arrived at that city in 1797, with his
pupil, Beach, and remained there about
five or six years; associated with politicians and men of science, attended the
medical lectures at the University, and, as
a Dissenter, preached occasionally for
Bishop Sanford, in the Episcopal chapel.
He was not, however, much known as a
clergyman, but distinguished as uniting
with Jeffrey and others in the establishment of the Edinburgh Review, and appreciated for his talents-especially for
his wit and satire.
It is, however, not so much for want of
zeal in the cause of evangelical religion,
for mere negative worldliness and for not
exhibiting that earnest faith in labours of
piety which should characterize the Christian minister, that the writer arraigns
Sydney Smith. It is for his sins of commission and not his sins of omission.
The listless preaching of the Word in his
own parish might, perhaps, call for a mild
rebuke, but the articles in the Edizburgh
Review demand severe animadversion, and
it is upon these that the paper is mainly
based. And first, the article on Methodism is brought up against him as follows In the discussion of this subject, the
author is careful to tell us that he is no
infidel: "It has been our good fortune to
be acquainted with many truly religious
persons, both in the Presbyterian and
Episcopalian churches; and from their
manly, rational, and serious characters,
our conceptions of true practical piety
have been formed." The religion which
he professes, and of which he is the minister, is Christianity shorn of its beams,
and deprived of all those peculiar qualities which the hand of God has stamped
upon it;,a religion which lets conscience
sleep, while the heart is unchanged, and
by which a man is lulled into a state of
complete self-comnplacency; a Christianity,
if it deserve the name, which has in it
nothing worthy of its Author; nothing
great or noble, nothing spiritual or holy,
nothing raised above the world; nothing,
in short, which puts to shame the claims
of a Pagan philosophy. Possessing such
a religion, not of divine, but of humani
workmanship, why should he flee to infidelity, and deny the authenticity of the
Scriptures? Why should he not love, and
defend, and worship it?
He shows the sentiments of the evangelical party by quoting largely from their
organs, or monthly magazines; endeavours to prove that their "religion is not
the religion which is established by law,
and encouraged by national provision;"
and promises to Dresent their "opinions
and habits as objects of curiosity and importance." What are these opinions?
They are the simple and fundamental
doctrines of the special providence of
God, the corruption of man, the necessity
of faith in the Redeemer, the importance
of holiness, the inefficacy of preaching
and the sacraments, without the influences
of the Holy Spirit. These doctrines, expressed sometimes in narratives, sometimes by notices, and sometimes by essays,
are held up to ridicule, and regarded as
the very cant of fanaticism. Take the
following, which expresses his views of
religion, sneers at divine grace, and conveys a personal sarcasm: "We ha-l hitherto supposed that the disciples of the established churches in England and Scotland had been Christians; and that after
baptism, duly performed by the appointed
ministers, and participation in the customary worship of these two churches,
Christianity was the religion of which
they were to be considered members. We
see, however, in these publications, men
of twenty and thirty years of age first
called to the knowledge of Christ, under
a sermon by the Rev. Mr. Venn; or first
admitted into the church, under a sermo n
by the R3v. Mr. Romaine. The apparent
292
[OCTOBER