Billeder på siden
PDF
ePub

66

fact. The doctrine," we are inform- | lead us to inquire, how far moral moed, "of a self-moving power of the tives can be said to operate like physiwill, renders a virtuous disposition and cally efficient causes? and the discuscharacter useless; for, if the will moves sion of this question would be irrelevant itself, utterly uninfluenced by any pre- to the nature of a solitary review. vious circumstances, of what use was it as to any future volitions, that the man was virtuous? for there would be no more ground to expect kind volitions from the beloved John, than from Domitian or Caligula; yet, who does not feel that this doctrine must be false?". (Evan. Mag. July, 1818.)

But what fate soever awaits the discussion of these abstruse questions, the uniform assertion of Dr. Clarke, that some actions are contingent, remains unimpeached. Should we again recur to the state of Adam, in what light can we view his condition, but that which will suggest the idea of contingency?

Plausible and imposing as this pas-Surveying our great progenitor in all the sage may appear, we shall perhaps find, circumstances of his situation, we must on examination, that it is not altogether finally bring our inquiries to this point,formed of sterling materials. It must be it was either possible or impossible for obvious to every reader, that, according Adam to have retained his state of to the above quotation, the determina- primeval rectitude. If it were possible, tion of the will must be in no small we then behold his future sinful act degree regulated by the disposition; for "poised on the possibility of being, or on this ground it is asserted, that "the not being" and, consequently, there doctrine of a self-moving power of are such things as contingencies within the will renders a virtuous disposition the reach of possibility. But if, on the and character useless." We will now contrary, it was impossible that Adam assume it as a fact, that the previous could have retained his rectitude, then state of the disposition is necessary to all the consequences to which Dr. Clarke the determination of the will,-that the has called our attention, must inevitably will coincides with the disposition,-and follow; and these form only a diminuthat they always act in unison. Let tive portion of the accumulated mass, us, now, apply this plausible theory to which must, in almost every departthe case of Adam, while in a state of ment, accompany moral actions, and primeval rectitude. Immediately prior involve our inquiries in consequences to his fall, his disposition must have which we shall shudder to behold. But been either morally good, or morally we must now turn to an examination of bad. If it were good, we must then the second general proposition, and to allow, that an evil volition originated the various branches connected with it. in a good disposition; and if it were This proposition refers immediately to bad, we must admit, that he possessed what is usually denominated Foreknowa sinful disposition before he fell. This ledge; which, as a divine attribute, latter conclusion cannot be supported, Dr. Clarke has been charged with because it compels us to allow, that Adam denying. Our inquiries must also exwas sinful and not sinful at the same tend to the certainty and contingency of time; which involves a plain contradic- events and actions, which we must surtion. And to admit the former, namely, vey in their relative connexion with the that an evil volition could originate in a Prescience of God. good disposition, is an absurdity not less palpable than the alternative. But, since neither the former nor the latter can be granted, the charm is dissolved which held the parts of the plausible proposition together, and the visionary fabric vanishes into empty air.

We are not, however, by any means disposed to deny all connexion between the disposition, and the volition which follows. The absurdities which would immediately succeed, are too obvious to permit us to imagine such a disunion. The term, disposition, may be viewed in various lights; but an investigation of these points would almost inevitably

On the assertion of Dr. Clarke, that the terms, foreknowledge and afterknowledge cannot, with strict propriety, be applied to the Almighty, when Our views of his infinite discernment are exclusively confined to him, we have already made several observations; and if what has been advanced can be presumed to have any weight, we are sanctioned in concluding, that the assertion of Dr. Clarke is founded on strict propriety so that with the eternal God nothing but simple, infinite knowledge can be said to exist.

It has been asserted by Dr. Clarke,it has been admitted by the critic in the

his necessary existence over all, and covers every mode of duration with the immensity of his presence. And as the actual existence of every finite being, comprehends the whole of that indivisible instant which is necessary to its existence, so the Eternal God comprehends, with his actual being, the incomprehensible vastness of infinite duration.

Evangelical Magazine,—it has been to comprehend all finite beings in their repeated by Verax, and granted by our-wide embrace, the eternal God extends selves, that "God must, on all occasions, know things as they actually are." This is a conclusion in which we all concur, how much soever we may vary in our opinions respecting the efficient causes of action, and the influence of motive in the production of moral effects. But while the critic in the Evangelical Magazine thus admits, that God" always views things as they are, and never as they are not," he assumes this admission as a reason, why he "must reject a large portion of what Dr. Clarke has said in another place." But this shall appear in his own words. "For when he (Dr. Clarke) asserts, that, strictly speaking, God has neither foreknowledge nor afterknowledge, but views all things, past, present, and to come, as in one eternal Now, we ask, is this viewing things as they are? The past and the future are not now. Nor can Dr. Clarke, or any other person, conceive of an eternal moment. We may arrange words into any propositions we please; but by the constitution of the human mind, we are incapable of attaching ideas to many of these propositions: and if there is any determinate meaning in words, we can no more conceive of a moment eternal in duration than we can of a mathematical point extended over infinite space.”— (p. 288.)

66

We are taught by an authority which cannot err, that with the Almighty one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. This proposition is perfectly intelligible, upon a supposition that our local divisions of time are not applicable to God. But should this be denied, we may repeat what has already been nearly asserted, that, we may arrange words into any propositions we please, but by the constitution of the human mind we are incapable of attaching ideas to these propositions; and if there is any determinate meaning in words, we can no more conceive of a thousand years being the same as one day, than we can of a mathematical point extended over intinite space."

But Dr. Clarke has involved himself, it seems, in contradictions, by asserting in the first place, that God sees things exactly as they are, and never as they are not; and in the second place, by contending, that the divine Being “has, strictly speaking, neither fore nor after knowledge, but that he views all things past, present, and to come, as in one eternal Now." On this, the critic asks, Is this viewing things as they are? The past and the future are not now. Nor can Dr. Clarke, or any other person, conceive of an eternal 'moment.'

6

From the questionable form in which these expressions are placed before us, it plainly appears, that the ideas which their author entertains of the divine existence, are very different from our own. The pure simplicity of nature, which associates itself with necessary existence, and with that Being of whom alone necessary existence can be predicated, places him far above all those In what manner the contradictoriness fleeting periods of successive duration, of Dr. Clarke's propositions is to be which we denominate past and future; made apparent, we acknowledge ourbut in such an exalted manner, as not selves at a loss to conceive. He does wholly to exclude, but to comprehend not say, that what is past or future to them both. In the vastness of his us, exists in one eternal Now to us, but being, his simple existence embraces almost exactly the reverse. Millions every possible mode of duration; for of actions and events, he contends, even simple duration, which is thus which are either past or future to us, are modified, to accommodate itself to our actually present with God; and this condition of limited existence, is con- consistency of expression arises from stituted solely by the universality of his what we may denominate his stationary existence. And if simple duration can-existence, to which even the revolutions not exist where God is not, so neither can any of those modes which simple duration may assume. Hence, although past, present, and future, may be said

of centuries must for ever remain inapplicable. An action or event may, therefore, be either past or future to us; and yet, in the view of an eternal Being,

be perceived, in reference to himself, as one eternal NOW.

We cannot, however, consider the phrase, ONE ETERNAL NOW, although it has been adopted for ages, and sanctioned by the highest authorities, in any other light than that of an accommodating expression, which the poverty of language compels us to use. The word NOW, can hardly be divested of its reference to time; and, although the words past and future, bring with them more unquestionable evidence of this reference, yet the same modes of reasoning which have been introduced with regard to them, can, with some trifling variations be advanced, to demonstrate this term to be equivocal, when used to express the Divine existence. No word that implies time in any of its various modes, can, with any degree of propriety, except in an accommodating sense, be adopted to convey the idea that is intended to be expressed. And, perhaps, the utmost height to which our most elevated thoughts can soar, on such an occasion, must finally terminate in this plain language, THE ETERNAL GOD EXISTS IN A TRANSCENDENT MANNER, WHICH NO EARTHLY ANALOGIES CAN ILLUSTRATE.

[To be continued in our next.]

Unitarianism weighed and found wanting; in a Series of Letters addressed to the Rev. George Harris, and occasioned by his Evening Lectures in Renshaw-street Chapel, Liverpool. By Robert Philip. London, pp. 65.

Ir appears from a short preface, with which this pamphlet is introduced to our notice, that, although the Evening Lectures of Mr. Harris may be assigned as the immediate cause of this publication, they did not suggest to Mr. Philip the first idea, of turning his attention to the Socinian controversy. Prior to this time, he had been preparing for the press a work of some considerable extent, in which the essential parts of these letters were embodied. But the observations made by Mr. Harris, and the arguments which he advanced, coinciding in many respects with those which Mr. Philip had previously examined, he was already furnished with the prominent parts of a reply, apparently written by a kind of accidental anticipation. These letters, which are seven in number, were then broken from their primitive connexion, and

filled up with such occasional remarks, as the Lectures, which had been delivered, very naturally suggested.

After commencing our perusal of this pamphlet, we must confess, that our expectations were far from being sanguine; and our reflections on the first letter, were by no means calculated to remove this unfavourable impression. To us the reasonings appeared rather vague and dubious. Even the premises themselves we could only view as problematical; and the conclusion, though legitimately deduced, we beheld as unimportant, because it could not boast of an exclusive application.

In prosecuting our task, the clouds, however, which had gathered round us in the commencement of our journey, began to dissipate; and as we gradually ascended an eminence to behold the author's views, the controversial horizon assumed a new aspect. Proceeding thus, we had made distinct observations on every letter, intending to introduce a comparative estimate of their respective importance. But, on reviewing the whole, the disproportion which would have appeared between the extent of the pamphlet, and our analysis of its contents, compelled us to abandon our original design, and to pursue this which we have now adopted.

In the examination of these letters, we have been forcibly struck with that connected view which the author has taken of Prophecy, Providence, and Fact; considered as distinct, but inseparable parts of one general system of divine economy. To each of these branches he directs the attention of his readers; and, after placing them fully in view under various aspects, he endeavours to infer, that neither Prophecy, Providence, nor Public Opinion, is favourable to Unitarianism: and, it must be confessed, that in most instances he has been successful. Throughout the whole, we find many sensible observations and appropriate arguments: an amiable spirit seems to breathe in almost every page; and several paragraphs are enriched with a pleasing originality of thought, The reasonings, however, are rather popular than profound; but their force is always recommended by their perspicuity; and to every reader, who rather wishes to have his judgment informed, than his understanding bewildered with paradoxes, this pamphlet presents no contemptible fund to satisfy moderate expectation.

66

Viewing Unitarianism merely as a | occasionally shines depends upon those rational system, or a speculative theory, adventitious circumstances, which ingeit will be readily admitted, that it has nuity knows how to impart. How far an imposing form, and an alluring the Author has been successful in this, appearance; but when, with this system the reader may form some opinion from in our hands, we turn to the doctrines the following specimen. of Revelation, we behold incongruities which dissolve the charm. On this point Mr. Philip has argued strongly in his sixth letter; and from his reasonings he has fairly inferred, that the moral condition of man, considered as a sinner, requires new principles of action, which natural religion is unable to supply, and which Unitarianism professedly disowns. These new principles, the sacred writings declare to be necessary; and it is among the peculiar beauties of Revelation, that it defines their nature, and points us to their primitive source.

That the doctrines of the Gospel seem to favour these new principles of moral action, the assertors of Unitarianism appear to be well aware; and, from the specimens which their improved version of the Scriptures affords, we are warranted in concluding, that a Bible formed upon Unitarian principles, would not be exactly like that which we have received from God. It is no good omen in favour of any system, to find complaints almost uniformly made against nearly all those passages which seem to frown upon it.

Of the rational mode of proceeding which so conspicuously associates itself with this accommodating system, the Author charges Mr. Harris in his fourth letter; and the term Sacrifice is adduced, as furnishing an evidence of the fact. This, instead of retaining, in the lexicons of Unitarianism, its primitive meaning, is taught to disown whatever its modern application does not imply; and hence it has no more connexion with expiation, than the patriotism or heroic suffering of Brutus, Hampden, or Sydney.

Of the leading articles which compose the Unitarian creed, the Author has placed before his readers an epitome, which seems neither to be distorted by misrepresentation, nor rendered defective through omission. The passages of scripture with which this creed is contrasted, are judiciously selected; and their importance derives an additional interest, from their appearing on a ground which we have not been always accustomed to tread. Truth requires only to be understood, to command our homage; but the lustre with which it

Suppose then, for a moment, that God, in a visible and indisputable manner, should abolish the Bible entirely, and give to the world, in its stead, a written copy of the Unitarian system, having all the authority and sacredness which the Bible has had. Suppose all this done in the eyes of all nations; and the creed of every nation Unitarian; and this state of things five hundred years old; and the present Bible utterly forgotten; and the existing commentaries and orthodox writings lost; and nothing extant but what you approve of now. You can have no serious objections to these suppositions, because the chief part of them are hopes you cherish, and wish to see realized. And it will reconcile you to the imaginary loss of the old Bible, when I remind you, that any unwillingness on this head, would betray a lurking suspicion, that your system is not scriptural at present.

"Now, Sir, suppose that after five hundred years, when your system would be dominant, and endeared by as many pious and learned works as Trinitarianism now boasts, some minister of talents and influence should address such a circular as the following to the Unitarian churches.

66 6

'Dearly beloved,

"Grace be with you, mercy and peace from God the Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of the Father, in truth and love! All men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father: and let all the angels of God worship him; for he is before all things, and by him all things consist. By him were all things created that are in heaven, and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were made by him and for him. His goings forth were of old, even from everlasting. When his Father addressed him, he says, 'Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever!"

Thou, Jehovah, in the beginning didst lay the foundation of the earth, and the heavens are the work of thy hands.' Therefore, it becomes us to ascribe," Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, unto Him that sitteth on the throne, and

unto the Lamb for ever;' because he | necessary to salvation, without the aid that honoureth not the Son, honoureth of critical analysis, or without requiring not the Father.-The grace of our Lord the exercise of the Unitarian pruningJesus Christ be with you all.' Amen. knife. We find, indeed, within its

[ocr errors]

How would such a letter be receiv-pages, depths in which leviathans may ed, Sir, by churches, formed on the swim; but it contains also shallows in principle that divine names and divine which lambs may wade. And in a honours are the exclusive rights of the revelation coming from God to teach Father? The writer would be brand- mankind the way to heaven, we should ed as an idolater, and his letter com- naturally expect, that no doctrines would mitted to the flames. Or, if any one be more seriously inculcated, more freleaned to his opinions, an appeal would quently repeated, or more unequivobe made to the New Bible, (which I cally expressed, than those which the have supposed,) and the wavering bro-divine benevolence had made necessary ther dared to produce from it, one to salvation; even though that wisdom instance in which Christ is called God, which is not from above, after havJehovah, or Creator. And you knowing invented or discovered difficulties, that he could not, if any of the existing summaries of Unitarianism were exalted into the rank of the Bible, and substituted in its room. And if these passages, which I have thrown into the form of a letter, would savour of idolatry five hundred years hence, (under that state of things I have supposed,) they do so now, on every principle but that of the Son's equality with the Father," p. 55.

The preceding extract exhibits a fair specimen of the Author's mode of arguing; but more unexceptionable passages might be selected, to display his talent at composition.

If an inhabitant of some unknown region, who had never heard of the discordant opinions which distinguish contending parties, were to examine our Bible, and were then called upon to give his judgment on the doctrines which it contains, no man can reasonbly suppose that he would decide in favour of Unitarianism. If, therefore, this system be true, and the Bible be a revelation from God, the sacred volume must be considered as one of the most astonishing prodigies that was ever submitted to the inspection of angels or men. In every view, its doctrines are of such a complexion, and its language is so constructed, that the book itself seems better calculated to lead men into error, than to shew them the way of salvation. It records instances of idolatry under the Christian system, which were unreproved; and teaches, by example as well as by precept, those very evils, which it informs us its Author abhors.

There can be little doubt, if the poor were to have the Gospel preached unto them, that the sacred books were intended to be understood, in every thing

To

might smile at the humility of faith, and
inquire- How can these things be?
But from Unitarianism we have learnt a
very different lesson. Its success seems
to depend upon the skill of its advo-
cates, whose critical dexterity the un-
learned cannot comprehend. And even
where the doctrines which it teaches
are embraced, they seem better calcu-
lated to give light to the head, than to
communicate virtue to the heart.
those doctrines which lead to the sound
and saving conversion of sinners to
God, and which make men new crea-
tures in Christ Jesus, Unitarianism can
make but very feeble pretensions. And,
we may rest assured, so long as we have
the sacred word for our guide, that the
religious system which does not lead to
the conversion of sinners, is not the sys-
tem of the Bible, nor the religion
revealed by God.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

"From the fame and grandeur of Christ's miracles, Nicodemus concluded, that he was a teacher come from God; for, as the ruler justly observed, no man can do these miracles that thou

doest, except God be with him.' This, you know, amounts to all the faith in Christ, which Unitarians think necessary or proper. This they consider as believing unto salvation, when the belief is accompanied with corresponding obedience. Now, Sir, if they are right in this opinion, we may expect, especially as true faith was a rare thing in Israel at the time, that Nicodemus's confession, although given by night, would be well received and highly approved of. But, instead of being so, Jesus took no notice whatever of it; and, what was very unusual with him, returned an abrupt answer to the 'mas'ter in Israel;' for you must allow, that the words, Verily, verily, I say unto

[ocr errors]
« ForrigeFortsæt »