« PreviousContinue »
termines what to do with them;' and that it is the wickedness of the wicked, which makes the certainty of their destruction;' we would ask, where is the Arminian, who would not say the sameiand, on what ground bas Dr. Beecher been keeping up a continual warfare with the Unitarians?" But, we would again inquire, Who has ordained the wickedness of the wicked? Who has said 'I form the light, and create darkness; I make peace, and create evil; I, the Lord, do all these these things??? — Did the Dr. forget that part of bis context, which says,--" Therefore hath he mercy, on whom he will bave mercy, and whom he will be hardeneth? How recently had he read the account of our Savior, when he “rejoiced in spirit, and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and revealed them unto babes: Even so, Father? for so it seemed good in thy sight?" Was it the wickedness of Pharoah that first determined God what to do with him? or did God determine his wickedness, and raise him up for this very purpose, to show in him his own power, and that his own name might be declared throughout all the earth?"
We were not at all surprised to find Dr. Beecher a Supralapsariad; but we were astonished beyond measure to hear him assert, that the Protestant Confessions were not Suprala psa rian.
We have ever considered the Protestant Confessions as Supralapsarian to a very high degree; and we are not as yet convinced to the contrary.
We know, too, that Arminians have ever been quarrelling with Calvin, because of bis Supralapsarianism, which even Semi-Calvinists will not presume to deny; and the same may be said of the Westminster Confession and Catechism.
It was nothing new to us, to bear the Dr, assert, that regeneration is not effected by the direct and positive agency of the Holy Spirit; for we bad before heard him advance the same sentiment. But being himself a Supralapsarian, and, with the Arminians, holding the supreme efficacy of moral suasion; it is truly marvellous to us, that he can be so inconsistent as to class himself among Calvinists. Nor can
we conceive bow any persons can consider Dr. Beecher as leading the van of orthodoxy, when he has evidently so far departed from the orthodoxy of the Protestants and Puritans. If he supposes, that he can stand half way between Calvinists and Arminians; we vastly mistake, if he does not find that ground to be nowhere. There is no consistent stopping-place between thorough Calvinism and genuine Arminianism; and neither Calvinists nor Arminians will long bear with a man who is neither one thing nor another.
What is it to stand on neutral ground? It is to profess one thing and do another. It is an old observation, which may, in general, be observed with perfect safety, “Always reckon neuters on the
wrong side.” No man, who professes to be neutral, either in feelings or conduct, in relation to any moral subject, is ever to be trusted. No man will even profess to take a neutral stand, on any moral subject, who does not lack either moral principle and moral courage. When, therefore, any mora! question comes up, which affects the general interests of community, and any man tells us he means to take no part either on one side or the other; we may always consider him as both dastardly and dishonest. He is dastardly, because he has not sufficient courage to avow his real feelings; and he is dishonest, because he professes to be indifferent, when he knows he is not. No man can stand entirely on neutral ground. Every moral subject, which presents itself to the mind, must necessarily engage both the feelings and the judgment, on one side or the other. We will believe a man just as soon, who will tell us that he stands upon the earth, wilhout a place to stand upon, as believe one who tells us he is entirely neutral in his conduct and feelings in relation to any moral subject, which has claimed enough of his attention to give it a name.
There is no occasion for remaining on neutral ground, in relation to moral subjects. One side or the other must be right, and it is always safe to act on the right side.
No person can innocently remain on neutral ground, if such a thing were possible. As every moral subject has a right and a wrong side; we are always under obligation to know the right, and to take a stand on that side. If it were possible, therefore, for any man to stand on neutral ground, he could not do it, and fulfil bis duty to himself, to his fellow creatures, or to his God.
Those who fess to take a neutral stand always will act on the wrong side. If they have not the moral courage and the moral principle to stand where they ought to stand; they will always have the meanness and wickedness, to throw in the weight of their inliuence into the scale of error, under the hypocritical cloak of professed neutrality. When people are arrayed in two parties on moral subjects, and a man tells us he intends to have nothing to do with either, we have no more confidence in bis moral honesty, than to believe he will savor the enemies of truth, the moment an opportunity presents itself for so doing-Ibid.
OLD FASHIONED HOPKINSIANISM.
Dr. Ely says, with exultation, that “old fashioned Hopkinsianism has been banished from Andover, from the General Association of Massachusetts, from the good little State of Connecticut, and nearly from the whole Presbyterian Church.” This declaration, we very much fear, is too true; and we frankly acknowledge, that we are among those, who, as he says, “greatly lament this defection.'
But, what is "old fashioned Hopkinsianism”? It is no more nor less than strict, and consistent, and “scriptural Calvinism;"
between which and Arminianism, there is no consistent medium, or place of standing. It is such Calvinism as Solomon taught, when he said, “ The king's heart is in the hand of the Lord, as the rivers of waters; he turneth it whithersoever he will. It is such Calvinvinism as Paul taught, when be said, “Work out your own salvavation with fear and trembling: for it is God who worketh in you both to will and to do, of his good pleasure.”_" For we are insufficient of ourselves to think any thing as of ourselves; but our sufficiency is of God.”—“For he saith unto Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy; and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. So then it is not of him that willeth, aor of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy. For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose bave I raised thee up, that I might show my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth. Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will be hardeneth. Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? for who hath resisted bis will? Nay but, Oman, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honor, and another unto dishonor? What if God, willing to show his wrath, and make his power known, endured with much long suffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: and that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy; which he had afore prepared unto glory”! It is such Calvinism as our blessed Saviour believed, professed and inculcated, when he prayed, " If it be possible, remove this cup from me; nevertheless not my will, but tbine be done;-if this cup may not pass from me, except I drink it thy will be done;" —when he taught his disciples to pray, " Thy will be done:”—and when he “rejoiced in spirit and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth; because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes: Even so, Father; for so it seemed good in thy sight.” It is such Calvinism as God himself taught, when he said, “ I will harden Pharoab's heart;" and, I have hardened his heart." " I form the light, and create darkness; I make peace and create evil; I, the Lord, do all these things.” If, then, “old fashioned Hopkinsianism has been banished Mom Andover, from the General Association of Massachusetts, from the good little State of Connecticut, and nearly from the whole Presbyterian Church;” it is evident, that they have banished the doctrines of the Bible, and the only "scriptural Calvinism” in existence; and it is no marvel that “ this defection from old fashioned Hopkinsianism is greatly lamented by the few who remain faithful to it in Massachusetts."
But, if they have banished old fashioned Hopkinsianism from Andover,' as Dr. Ely astirms; we would inquire, what has become of their old fashioned Hopkinsian Creed, which was wittingly framed for the purpose of securing the infiuence of Dr. Samuel Spring, and large benefactions through his agency? We fear they never had much Hopkinsianism at Andover, save the Creed referred to; and if they have 'banished' that, Hopkinsianism is indeed gone, from the institution; for the Creed was surely all they had left. With here and there an honorable and honest exception, we have dever known a preacher, who received his theological education at Andover, but wbat appeared disposed to throw the great and fundamental doctrines of the gospe into the shade; and we think that the truly orthodox have as much reason to complain of perversion of funds at Andover, as of perversion of funds at Cambridge.
Dr. Ely, however, speaks of “ modern Hopkinsianism," in distinction from the “old fashioned;" and says it “ has become assimilated to moderate, reasonable, scriptural Calvinism,” which he calls “ the prevalent Calvinism of the Presbyterian Church in the United States." We know of no such divinity, as modern Hopkiosianism,” in distinction from the “old fashioned.” Those who have departed from the great and fundamental doctrines of the gospel, as they have been taught, explained and enforced by Calvin and Hopkins, and Spring, and Emmons, are neither Hopkinsians nor Calvinists, in any sense whatever. There is no stopping place between strict Calvinism and gross Arminianism; and those whom Dr. Ely would call 'moderate, reasonable and scriptural Calvinists,' are rapidly taking ground with those, who set aside the sovereignty of God, his immediate agency in the production of moral exercises, the supreme efficiency of the Holy Spirit in regeneration; and who hold to a self-determining power, and the efficacy of moral suasion, which lie at the very foundation of Arminianism, as taught by Dr. Taylor, of Norwich
In respect to Dr. Ely's exultation, in view of the 'banishment of Hopkinsianism,' we would say, “Let not him that putteth on bis armor, boast himself as he that putteth it off.”—There is yet more of genuine Hopkinsianism in the land, than he apprehends. If it is not generally found among the clergy; it is found among our most intelligent, pious and devoted laymen, who are beginning to open their eyes to discern, and their mouths to inquire after “the Lord God of Elijah.” Even in this city, there are numerous laymen of talents, piety and respectability, who feel themselves starving for the sincere milk of the word; who are beginning, with great earnestness, to inquire after the old paths, that they may find the honey and the honey-comb;" and the more they taste of the little honey,' the more their eyes are enlightened,' to discern the vast difference between the modern, and the apostolic mode of preaching. A vast many in our churches, who remember, with lively interest, the days of old, and the marrow and fatness, with which the people were fed.by the ministrations of Hopkins, and Edwards junior, and Spring, and Niles, and the Strongs, and West of Stockbridge, and other faithful shepherds of the last generation; are now much more orthodox than their pastors, and are heartily sick and disgusted with the present declamatory, puerile and uninstructive mode of preaching. The truth is not dead yet; and if ministers refuse to come up to the good old standard of orthodoxy, and begin to instruct and feed their people; their people will soon find means to instruct and feed themselves and ministers will be put to silence and to shame.--Ibid.
From the Christian Mirror.
TO A CHILD.
Then to thy God in early childhood raise
D. D. D.
RELIGIOUS. Churches in Maine.-In the report of the delegates from the General Conference of Maine, to the Presbyterian General Assembly, May, 1831, it is stated, that “ of the 157 churches belonging to the General Conference, 125 enjoy the administration of the word and ordinances from 111 ministers at stated times. One third at least of all the pastors of churches have been settled within the last three years. Upwards of 30 of our churches are destitute.