תמונות בעמוד
PDF
ePub
[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][subsumed][subsumed][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][subsumed][merged small][merged small][merged small][subsumed][merged small][merged small][subsumed][ocr errors][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]
[blocks in formation]

THE design of this work, the reasons for undertaking it, and the principles on which it was proposed to be conducted, were fully explained in the Introduction to the first volume. Whether it has hitherto been conducted according to these principles, and in such manner as to meet the reasonable expectations of friends, our readers have the means of judging for themselves.

The work obviously was commenced under great disadvantages. The year had opened before it was seriously contemplated, and more than a month had elapsed, before it was announced. That a subscription commenced at this late period should have succeeded, as ours has done, is certainly a very encouraging fact, evincing that the reasons for the undertaking are duly appreciated, and that a work like ours is felt to be needed.

Respecting the contents and general character of the last volume, it is hardly to be expected that all who agree with us in doctrine should form precisely the same judgement. Some may have thought our articles too long, and the subjects of them too little diversified; while others have considered them too controversial, and not sufficiently pacific and practical in their tendency.

In regard to suggestions such as these, we can only assure our readers, that we have endeavored to do what, with our means of judging, seemed to be right. We have proceeded, from number to number, with a conscientious regard to what we believed our duty, and under a solemn, and often an almost overwhelming sense of responsibility, as to the impression we might make on the public mind.

It should be considered, too, that our work is not designed to be filled up with short scraps, and anecdotes, and items of intelligence, with a view to gratify a great diversity of tastes, and afford amusement for a leisure hour. It is intended rather for discussion; and for the discussion of important, and sometimes of difficult, and disputed subjects. It is intended to communicate, as occasion may demand, extended and labored articles, which will require the reader to think, to study, and discriminate, in order to understand them, and feel interested in them. And those of our readers who JANUARY, 1829.

1

are unwilling to think, and consequently are uninterested in communications of this nature, (though to such, above all others, mental effort is necessary) may as well give up their subscriptions, and proceed no farther with us.

On the subject of religious controversy, to which some portion of our work has been devoted, we can little more than repeat the remarks which were made at the commencement of the last volume. If controversy is in itself an evil, it cannot be doubted that it is often a necessary evil. The inspired prophets had frequent controversy with false prophets. Our Saviour was often in controversy with scribes, Pharisees, and priests. The apostles also had much controversy with Jews, and Pagans, and heretical brethren. And the faithful in all ages have been obliged to contend with the opposers of truth, and the enemies of their Lord. So long as there must be heresies,' there must be controversy, to expose and refute sophistry; to prevent the inexperienced and unwary from being turned out of the way; and to rescue, if possible, deluded souls. Our readers will bear us witness that we have not manifested a disposition to dispute on trivial matters, or on points of mere circumstantial difference. We have contended, when contending at all, for the great and fundamental principles of the Gospel-for those truths which respect the object of our worship, the foundation of our hope, and the terms of our final acceptance and salvation-for everything, in short, which is dear to us as Christians. If decision and engagedness can be justified on any subjects, they surely can be on subjects such as these.

We indulge the hope that the present volume may be less controversial than the last; but even of this we cannot be sure, as it must depend materially on the course pursued by others, and on circumstances over which we have no direct control. If the Unitarian controversy is to be continued in this region, we have to request of our opponents at least one thing,-which is, that they furnish us in future with less occasion for the charge of misrepresentation, than they have done in times past. If they wish to convince us of our alleged errors, they must learn to state these errors fairly. They must state and refute them as we actually hold them.

One particular, in which we are continually misrepresented, is that we are charged with certain modifications of Orthodoxy, as they may be held now in other portions of our country, and as they were held by Calvinists generally, in the former part of the last century. It would be some apology for Unitarians, if they were ignorant of the different views which we entertain on the subjects here referred to. But the truth is, they are not ignorant, unless they are ignorant of their own books.

At the time when the Theological Seminary at Andover was instituted, and for several years afterwards, the differences between

"Calvinists" and "Hopkinsians,” or “Andoverians," as they were sometimes called, constituted a favorite topic of discussion with the selfstyled liberal party. These differences were enlarged upon, and magnified, in hope, as it should seem, of making them a ground of radical and permanent separation among the Orthodox, and of weakening the friends of essential truth by division.* But failing in this, the subject of these differences has been for several years dropped, and a directly opposite course has been pursued. It has been and is very strenuously insisted on, that there is no perceptible difference of sentiment between the Orthodox of New England now, and Calvinists a hundred years ago; and that, willing or unwilling, we shall be held responsible for all that persons calling themselves Calvinists, of any age, or of any country, have thought proper to hold and to teach.

Now this is manifestly unfair and unjust, especially as we have made repeated explanations, and have always endeavored to be as explicit as possible. Why should we not be as explicit as possible? There is no part of our religious system which we have any interest or inclination to conceal. We are willing, and we earnestly wish, that those who differ from us should possess our views on the whole subject of religion, as fully as we possess them ourselves.

In our first article, we gave an exposition of our faith, which has been called, not inappropriately, the "creed of the Spirit of the Pilgrims." As that exposition expresses positively what in several particulars we do believe, it may serve to prevent misapprehension, or to make misapprehension the more inexcusable, if we here express negatively, in a few particulars, what we do not believe.

We do not believe that the persons of the Trinity are in all respects distinct, and independent beings; for this would preclude unity in any sense: nor do we believe they are one, in the same sense that they are three; for this would imply a contradiction.

We do not believe that Jesus is in his human nature God, or in his divine nature man. In respect to his human nature, he is doubtless inferior, and in his official character he is subordinate, to the Father. Hence the passages so often urged to prove his inferiority to the Father are not at all inconsistent with our system, but support it.

We do not believe that God has made a part of mankind on purpose to damn them; or that he compels them to sin; or that he mocks them with offers of pardon on conditions which they have no power to comply with; or that he punishes them eternally for not performing impossibilities.

While we believe the doctrine of election, as stated and explained in the New Testament, we do not believe the elect will be

* See Anthology for Nov. 1808, p. 602. Review of Ely's Contrast in the General Repository, vol. iv. p. 324, and Christian Disciple, vol ii. pp. 166, 236, and 328.

+ Unitarian Advocate, vol. i. p. 193.

saved, if they persist in transgression; or that the nonelect will be damned, if they confess and forsake their sins. We hold this doctrine in perfect consistency with the sincere offer of life to all, and with the salvation of those, and those only, who freely accept it.

We do not believe that the posterity of Adam are personally chargeable with eating the forbidden fruit; or that their constitution is so depraved as to leave them no natural ability to love and serve God, or as to render it improper for him to require obedience.

In making atonement for men, we do not believe that Christ endured the same amount of suffering which their sins deserve; or that he so cancelled their debt to justice that nothing is due on their behalf; or that the sufficiency of the atonement is so limited, that all may not be saved, on the ground of it, who comply with the offers of salvation.

We do not believe that the sinner in the moment of conversion is mechanically and involuntarily wrought over into another kind of being; but that he then begins, under the special influence of the Holy Spirit, and with the free and full consent of his heart, to love, serve, and enjoy God.

We hold the doctrine of justification by faith, as not dispensing with the necessity of an obedient life, but the rather enforcing it.

We hold the perseverance of saints, not as securing their salvation without respect to their future characters, but as implying that, through the grace of God, they will persevere in the voluntary exercise and practice of holiness to the end of their lives.

And we hold the doctrine of eternal punishment as implying, not that God is vengeful, or malicious, or delights in the sufferings of his creatures, but that he is a righteous Sovereign, who, in governing the intelligent universe, must maintain the honors of his law, by inflicting its just penalty on those who obstinately transgress it.

This enumeration of particulars might be greatly extended, but we deem it unnecessary. After the explanations made here, and in other parts of our work, if any will persist in misapprehending and misrepresenting our views, the public must judge whether the blame attaches to them, or to us.

Our Orthodox brethren have complained, and we think with good reason, of a want of explicitness on the part of Unitarians, ever since this controversy commenced. For some cause or other, they have manifested a disposition to keep back, and conceal their sentiments. They have shown a reluctance to come out frankly and openly, and make the world acquainted with their views. In many instances, they have employed words and phrases similar to those in popular use, but employed them in a disguised and peculiar sense. And their sentiments have come to be known, so far as they are known, only in consequence of incidental disclosures, or as they have been drawn out by the force of discussion.

« הקודםהמשך »