Billeder på siden
PDF
ePub

troversies of religion, which forms a prominent subject of my lectures. I may often give you, from ancient writers, the history of opinions, and may occasionally combat those misrepresentations of that history which are found in modern authors, eager to call in every aid to support their particular systems. But I shall quote the Christian fathers as historians, not as authorities. I know no authority upon which you ought to rest in judging of the truth of any doctrine but the Scriptures, and therefore I consider sacred criticism as the most important branch of the study of theology. We are to avail ourselves of an intimate acquaintance with the language of the New Testament, i. e. with the meaning of single words, with the usual acceptation of phrases, and with the real amount of figurative expression. We are to study the general customs of the people amongst whom that language was used, and the habits of thinking which might dictate a particular phraseology to some writers. We are to investigate the mind of an author, by comparing his language in one place with that which occurs in another, and we are to endeavour to attain a full and precise conception of the whole doctrine of Scripture upon every point, by laying together those passages of Scripture in which it is stated under different views.

It is by this patient exercise of reason and criticism that a student of divinity is emancipated from all subjection to the opinions of men, and led most certainly into the truth as it is in Christ Jesus. It is the great object of my lectures, to assist you in this exercise, and I may hope, after having bestowed mnch pains in going before you, to be of some use in abridging your labour, by pointing out the shortest and most successful method of arriving at the conclusion. I shall not decline giving my opinion upon the passages which I quote, and the comparison of Scripture which I shall often make. But I do not desire you to pay more regard to my opinions than to those of any other writer, unless in so far as they appear to you upon examination to be well founded. You will derive more benefit from canvassing what I say than from imbibing all that I can teach; and the most useful lessons which you can learn from me are a habit of attention, a love of truth, and a spirit of inquiry.

CHAPTER VII.

ARRANGEMENT OF THE COURrse.

OUR Shorter Catechism, and our Confession of Faith, are formed upon the course in which systems of divinity commonly proceed, and both of them are clear and well digested. You will find another excellent abridgment of the ordinary course in Marckii Medulla Theologiæ, a duodecimo of three hundred pages, which used to be the text book in St. Mary's College, and which, in my opinion, ought to be read by every student of divinity, not early, but before he finishes his studies. You will see in this little book all the controversies that have been agitated. But you will see them in the order of the system, and the order is this. After a general account of the nature of theology, and of the Scriptures as the principle of theology, the following subjects succeed one another. God and the Trinity-the decrees of God-the execution of these decrees in the works of Creation-a view of the visible and invisible world-the Providence and government which God exercises over his works-man-the state of innocence-the fall-the consequences of sin-the covenant of grace -the person, offices, and state of the Mediator of the covenant-the benefits of the covenant-the duties of those who partake of the benefits-the sacraments—the Church-the final condition of mankind.

Upon all these subjects, the orthodox doctrine is stated, and the objections that have been made to the several parts of the doctrine are answered, so that every chapter contains an account of the several opinions, that have been held upon all the points that occur in the chapter. I was afraid to entangle myself in this course, partly from an apprehension, proceeding both upon the number of subjects which it embraces, and upon the experience of other professors of divinity who have engaged in it, that it was likely to stretch out to such a length, as to leave me no hope of finishing my lectures during the longest term of attendance which the law prescribes to students; and partly from an opinion that the arrangement adopted in the ordinary course is not the most perfect. You will not think this opinion ill founded, when you come to read Marckii Medulla; for there, and I believe, in every other of the common systems, there is so close an alliance between the subjects treated under the different heads, that the same principles are frequently resorted to in order to illustrate the orthodox doctrine; objections, the same in substance with those that had been answered in a former chapter, recur under a different form, and the same answers are repeated with only a little variation in the

manner of applying them. I am very far from condemning this arrangement as in all respects improper. It was adopted by very able men; it is most useful for giving a thorough acquaintance with all the parts of the Scripture system; and there is one book in which it appears to such advantage, that what I account its imperfection is almost forgotten, I mean Calvin's Institutes of the Christian religion; a book written in Latin, that is not only perspicuous, but elegant, and giving a most masterly comprehensive view of the great points in theology. It consists of four books. The first is entitled, De Cognitione Dei Creatoris. The second, De Cognitione Dei Redemptoris. The third, De Modo Percipiendæ Christi gratiæ, et qui fructus inde nobis proveniant, et qui effectus consequantur. The fourth, De Externis Mediis ad Salutem. It requires much time to read this book carefully; but when a student has leisure to make it his business, he will find his labour abundantly recompensed; and I do not know a more useful book for a clergyman in the country. It may be purchased for a trifle, and it is the best body of divinity. But excellent and profitable as this book is, the imperfection which I mentioned adheres to the plan upon which it is composed; and although the order of Calvin's Institutes appears to me simpler and more natural than that of any other system which I have read, yet I think that, if I were to attempt to follow it, I should be reminded by frequent repetitions, that a more perfect arrangement might have rendered the course shorter and less fatiguing.

This impression led me to attend to another arrangement of the controversies, which has been executed with much ability by some theological writers. Every controversy is stated by itself; i. e. all the distinguishing opinions of those, who derive a particular name from the peculiarity of their tenets, are brought into one view, and are referred to one general principle, so that you see the system of their creed, and can mark the connection between the several parts. To give an example: Socinianism is the system of those who hold the opinions of Socinus. The principle of Socinianism is, that man may be saved by that religion, which is founded upon the relation between God the Creator and man his creature. From this principle flow their opinions with regard to the intention of Christ's death as a witness to the truth, and an example to his followers, but not as an atonement for sin; their exclusion of mysteries from religion; and all those tenets by which they transform the Christian religion into the most perfect system of morality. The principle of Pelagianism, or of those who hold the opinions of Pelagius, is this, that the natural powers of man since the fall are sufficient to enable him to keep the law of God. From this principle flow the opinions of the Pelagians concerning original sin, the decrees of God, the influences of the Spirit, and the measure of perfection which may be attained upon

earth.

This method of arranging the controversies is manifestly much more scientific than the former. In every set of opinions which deserves the name of a system, there are some leading principles which connect the several parts. It is an agreeable exercise of the understanding to trace these principles, and to mark that kind of unity and subordination which arises from their influence. It is an act of jus

tice in those who examine the opinions of others, to take into view that mutual dependence which renders them a consistent whole; and it is an endless unavailing task to attempt to defend the truth against a multitude of detached errors, unless your reasoning reach the sources from which these errors proceed. I recommend it, therefore, to those students who, in the course of their reading, have attained an intimate acquaintance both with the evidences of Christianity and with the particular doctrines of our faith, to study the most important controversies in this scientific manner. You will derive much assistance in this branch of your researches from Mosheim's Church History, which is an invaluable treasure of theological knowledge. This most learned and ingenious author, who, when read along with the able and judicious notes of his translator Maclaine, is in almost every instance a safe guide, has given, in one division of his work, a summary of all the heresies or particular opinions that were held in the different ages of the church. He has traced their rise and their progress, and has discriminated, with critical acumen, those which appear to an ordinary eye almost the same. As his work, from its nature, makes mention of all the controversies, both those which are important and those which are trifling, you cannot expect that even the opinions upon which he has judged it proper to bestow the most particular attention, will be fully elucidated in a book which comprehends such an extent of time, and such a variety of matter. You will supply this unavoidable defect by the books which Mosheim quotes in his notes, or which I recommend: and from the general index which he furnishes, and the treatises which professedly explain the particular subjects, you will be able to form a distinct connected view of every one of the five controversies which are universally interesting, and which are commonly known by the names of Arianism, Pelagianism, Socinianism, Arminianism, and the Popish controversy. There are many other controversies that turn upon very important points. But they have not been so perfectly digested into the form of a system as the five now mentioned, nor have they been defended with such ability as to occupy a great part of the attention of a student.

Although I thus earnestly recommend attention to the scientifical arrangement of the controversies, I have been restrained from adopting it as the plan of my course by the following reasons. Some of the five great controversies resemble one another in several points. Thus Pelagianism and Arminianism both turn upon the natural powers which man has, since the fall, to obey the will of God. Socinianism agrees with Pelagianism upon this point, and it agrees with Arianism in denying that Jesus is truly God, while it differs from Arianism in the account which it gives of his person. You may judge from this specimen, that although the scientifical method, which I mentioned, is unquestionably the best for making you acquainted with any particular system of opinions, yet to us, who mean to review all the most important controverted points, it would necessarily be attended with much repetition. We should often meet, under different names, with the same objections, and the same heretical opinions, and we should be obliged to bring forward the same arguments and the same passages of Scripture in answer to them. Further, our object is not so much to know who held the particular opinions, and

what was the age in which they lived; but what were the various opinions upon the great subjects of theology, and what were the grounds upon which they rested. We may attain this object, although we confound the shades of difference between systems that nearly approach, and therefore to us it were a needless waste of research and of time to discriminate them nicely. Further still, as every one of the five great controversies embraces particular opinions upon many different points, the arranging the five separately breaks the subjects of theology into parts, and does not afford a full united view of any one subject. You will understand what I mean from an example. Besides the opinions of the early ages concerning the person of Christ, one opinion was held in the third century by Arius, another at a much later period by Socinus, and a third has been the general doctrine of the Christian church. Any one who wishes to make himself master of this interesting subject will desire to see the different opinions brought together, that he may compare their probability, that he may judge of the support which every one of them receives from particular passages of Scripture, or from the analogy of faith, and may thus attain a conclusion which he can defend by good reasons. Had you a book continually by you, in which all the controversies were arranged singly, you might make a collation of the different opinions upon the same subject, by reading first a part of Arianism, then the corresponding part of Socinianism, and next the corresponding part of that system which is called Orthodox, in the same manner as you get a full view of a siege in the Peloponnesian war, by passing directly from the portion of the siege which is written in one book of the history of Thucydides, to the portion of the same siege which is written in another book. But you could not make this collation in hearing a course of lectures, unless I repeated under one controversy as much of what I had said under the corresponding part of another, as to bring it to your mind; and this repetition would be a proof that the arrangement, however favourable to your understanding any one system of opinions, is unfavourable to your understanding the whole controverted subject.

Once more, there is in the different opinions upon the same subject a progress that may be traced, by which you see how one paved the way for the other; and the succeeding opinion is often illustrated by the preparation which had been made for its reception. This advantage is lost, when you throw together the different subjects that were agitated in one system of opinions. You see, in this way, the chain which binds together all the parts of Pelagianism, Arminianism, or Socinianism. But in passing along the chain, you miss the thread which conducts you from the opinions on a particular subject found under one system, to the opinions on the same subject found under another.

For these reasons, I resolved neither to follow the path of the ordinary systems of theology, nor to adopt the more scientific mode of classing the opinions that distinguish different sects of Christians. The plan of my course is this:

Out of the mass of matter that is found in the system, I select the great subjects which have agitated and divided the minds of those who profess to build their faith upon the same Scriptures. I consider

« ForrigeFortsæt »