Sivut kuvina
PDF
ePub

regenerated, without the special interposition of God. Of what possible use, then, can it be, either for enforcing man's duty, or for vindicating God's equity, or for any thing else of the least practical consequence, to decide such questions as, whether the soul is active or passive in regeneration? or whether it does or does not take place prior to the soul's first holy act? or whether it consists in an act or in a disposition? These are as worthless points as were ever discussed, so long as the disputants, on both sides, hold to the common theory of human nature and divine agency.

Still it is not without interest, and some degree of pleasure, that we witness even such differences and discussions among our orthodox brethren. So long as

error exists in a community, it is best that it should be multiform, and that its elements should war with one another. Solemn trifling as we consider to be the controversies, in which the 'old' and 'new' Calvinists are engaged, good, nevertheless, may come of them to theology, as alchymy proved useful to chemistry, and as mapping out the skull,' may subserve intellectual philosophy. However blind they may, for a time, be, to the extrinsic absurdity of their system, there is hope of its finally giving place to a better one, while they contend sharply about its intrinsic relations. Although, therefore, Dr Cox, and his brethren of the 'new' school, do not seem, as yet, to have stepped out of the magic circle described around them by education and authority, so as to view, from a distance, the external aspect of orthodoxy, and, by thus surveying its relations, as a whole, to truth and nature, to form an opinion of its real character; still they have done something to

encourage us, inasmuch as they have dared to look into its interior economy, to find fault with the connections of its parts, to force a discussion of points which others would fain shield from scrutiny, to make concessions which could not, how muchsoever desired, be any longer decently withheld, and to warn the community of the dangerous tendency of some of its most cherished principles.

6

When we began our remarks, we were not aware of the importance attached to Dr Cox's discourse, by the leaders of the two parties, into which our orthodox brethren seem to be divided. Besides the attack upon it by the Princeton divines, which has been noticed, we have just read a highly commendatory review of the same sermon, in the June number of the Christian Spectator, published at New Haven; and we cannot close this article without adverting to some of the topics it treats, relative to the controversy of which we have undertaken to give our readers an account. After eulogising Dr Cox as a powerful preacher,' bestowing great praise on his sermon, and bespeaking attention to the subject of it, as 'one of the most interesting and important in the whole range of christian theology,' the writer in the Spectator proceeds to one of the great questions at issue between the 'old' and 'new' Calvinists, viz. whether the soul is active or passive in regeneration; and in direct opposition to a remark we have quoted from the Princeton 'Repertory,' says: Perhaps the solution of this single question may be the pivot on which shall turn whole systems in divinity; the radiating point, from which may shoot off rays into whole regions of surrounding twilight and mid

night darkness.'—p. 348. For ourselves, we do not much care on what 'pivot' systems of divinity turn, provided they take the direction of truth; nor from what point' the light radiates, provided it dispels the 6 darkness' with which not a few of our brethren, it seems to be acknowledged, are at present surrounded. That a partial illumination at least is beginning to fall even in Connecticut, on some grounds of theological controversy, will sufficiently appear to such as are much acquainted with Calvinism, from the extracts which follow.

The first we make relates to human nature. Undoubtedly the advocates of modern orthodoxy at New Haven, entertain opinions on this subject about as inconsistent with reason and truth, as their opponents of the 'old' school. Yet who recognizes any thing like Calvinism in this?

[ocr errors]

Representations of the character of man, as if there were some mass of corruption, seated in the constitution of the moral agent, or some concreated feebleness of faculty, or positive defect, or latent and terrible poison, in the structure of the soul, involving all the proclaimed condemnations of apostacy only by its existence there, even while it slumbers, are as much a violation of the dictates of common sense, and of the laws of the mind, as of the sacred scriptures.'-p. 346.

So, too, with regard to man's ability and God's agency in the process of regeneration, the conductors of the Spectator embrace a theory little more tenable, perhaps, on the whole, than that of the Princeton divines. Still, it is something that it is so different, in any respect, from the Calvinistic theory. After quoting such scriptures as these; seek and ye shall find;' 'come unto me and I will give you rest;' they ask:

'Now, in reading these passages-and they have reference to the very point in debate, the commencement of religion in the soul; -would it ever occur that they regarded man in any other light, than as being active in the entire work of religion? Do they look as if the sacred penman, ever considered their minds as mere passive recipients, in any part of this work? Do they not speak as men do on other subjects, when they express activity? And is not the natural language of these expressions, that the mind is as far as possible from stagnation, or torpor, or "moral panic?" Let it be remembered also, that they speak of the actings of the mind, in all the changes which it experiences in religion. There is nothing in the change of which they speak, anterior to ACTION; no department of the moral man in which christianity obtains a lodgment, that is not expressed by language describing man's own agency.’—p. 350.

Again, their notions of election we deem incorrect; yet in their controversy with the 'old' Calvinists, they use language which we can readily adopt; language that would have sounded strangely in orthodox ears, a few years ago.

What is the doctrine of election, on the theory of our opponents? That a part of mankind are taken to eternal life, in consequence of a change of heart, in which they had no share. That the remainder sink to hell, for wanting that which did not depend upon themselves-for wanting "a holy principle" distinct from, and independent of, any act of their own-and for wanting that influence of God, by which such a principle is created in the breast of the redeemed! With exactly the same justice might any man be condemned to perdition for wanting talents, beauty or wealth. These are the representations of the doctrine of election, which have made it so odious in many parts of our land. Every principle of man's nature rises up against such statements. They make the whole system of the doctrines of grace, a loathing and an abhorrence to thousands. They steel the hearts of multitudes against the influence of divine truth. Other multitudes they place in the attitude of passive 'recipients, waiting for some mysterious gift distinct from their own agency. With entire respect, and with personal affection for many who make these statements, we are compelled to say, that, in our view, they take upon themselves a tremendous responsibility in so doing. Woe to that minister of God, who, in His name, proclaims

to men to wait in the solemn duties of their souls, for the expected aid of the Almighty, or to delay the effort for repentance, till He shall send them new powers or principles of action, from on high. In all the oracles of truth, not one such direction is found.'--p. 357.

Once more, in respect to faith, it is gratifying to us to quote, from an orthodox source, sentiments, such as Unitarians have been suffering the reproach of 'heresy,' these many years, for uttering.

When we look at faith, without reference to any theological debate, we see nothing that is particularly mysterious about it as an operation of the mind; nothing which by any inherent properties separates it from the usual actings of moral agency. It is belief in testimony;—that is, credit given to truth according to evidence, implying action in looking at this evidence, and in coming to the re. sult.' In all this we see only the actings of the mind. Take away that act of mind—the putting forth of confidence, trust, or belief, and what remains? There is nothing tangible or conceivable, but that act of the mind.' 'A child puts confidence in a parent's promise. This is faith. He relies on him in the hour of danger; he fears when he threatens. That is also faith. But besides this act of the mind in the child, there is nothing that can be detected or conceived of in relation to the subject, that deserves praise or blame. So of the christian. All that we know of this crowning christian grace is, that the man believes; hopes, loves, fears, puts trust in God.'

And so

'But it is said that faith is the gift of God. This is true. are repentance, love, hope, and peace, the gift of God, and in the same sense, and to the same extent. The passage of scripture which says, "for by grace are ye saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God," may perhaps be objected to the view here given. But it should be remembered that while the sentiment which appears to be taught there is true, it is not the truth which that passage contains. In the original, the word "that" refers not to faith, but to the salvation by grace. It would be correctly rendered, Ye are saved by grace through faith, and this salvation by grace through faith is not of yourselves, it is the gift of God:-a sentiment not asserting any thing peculiar in the gift of faith above other graces.'

To this view of faith, we know there is presented a difficulty, in the technicalities of some systems of theology, drawn we believe

« EdellinenJatka »