Predestinarians.Are those who believe that God, for his own glory, hath foreordained whatsoever comes to pass. (See Matt. 25:34. Rom. 8:29, 30. Eph. 1:3, 6, 11. 2 Tim. 1:9. 2 Thess. 11:13. 1 Pet. 1:1, 2. John 6:37; 17:2-24. Rev. 13:8; 17:8. Dan. 4:35. 1 Thess. 5:19. Matt. 11:26. Exod. 4:21. Prov. 16:4. Acts 13:48.)Orthodox Creeds.Orthodoxy literally signifiescorrect opinions. The word is generally used to denote those who are attached to the Trinitarian scheme of Christian doctrine.[pg 133]The following article is found in the“Spirit of the Pilgrims,”vol. v. No. 1, and is supposed to have been written by the late Rev.Benjamin B. Wisner, D. D., pastor of the Old South church, Boston.The following summary contains the more material parts of the Orthodox faith. Those who embrace this system believe,—“That, since the fall of Adam, men are, in their natural state, altogether destitute of true holiness, and entirely depraved.“That men, though thus depraved, are justly required to love God with all the heart, and justly punishable for disobedience; or, in other words, they are complete moral agents, proper subjects of moral government, and truly accountable to God for their actions.“That in the unspeakable wisdom and love of God was disclosed a plan of redemption for sinful men.“That, in the development of this plan, God saw fit to reveal so much concerning the nature and the mode of the divine existence, as that he is manifested to his creatures as the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost; and that these three, each partaking of all the attributes of the Deity, and being entitled to receive divine worship and adoration, are the one living and true God.“That the Son of God, laying aside the glory which he had with the Father from everlasting, came down from heaven, took upon himself man's nature, and by his humiliation, sufferings, and death, made an atonement for the sins of the world.“That, in consequence of this atonement, the offer of pardon and eternal life was freely made to all; so that those who truly repent of sin, and believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, will be saved.“That men are naturally so averse to God and holiness, that, if left to themselves, they reject the offers of salvation, and neither repent of sin nor truly believe in a Savior.[pg 134]“That God, being moved with infinite love and compassion, sends forth the Holy Spirit, according to his sovereign pleasure, by whose beneficent energy an innumerable multitude of the human family are renewed, sanctified, and prepared for heaven; while others are suffered to pursue the course which they have freely chosen, and in which they obstinately persevere till the day of salvation is past.“That God, in his providential dispensations, in the bestowment of his saving mercy, and in his universal government, exhibits his adorable perfections, in such a manner as will call forth the admiration and love of all holy beings forever.“That believers are justified by faith, through the efficacy of the atonement, so that all claims of human merit, and all grounds of boasting, are forever excluded.“That the law of God is perpetually binding upon all moral beings, and upon believers not less than other men, as a rule of life; and that no repentance is genuine unless it bring forth fruits meet for repentance, and no faith is saving unless it produce good works.“That those who have been renewed by the Spirit will be preserved by the power of God, and advanced in holiness unto final salvation. And,“That Christ, as the great King of the universe, the Lord and Proprietor of created beings, will judge the world at the last day, when the righteous will be received to life eternal, and the wicked will be consigned to endless punishment.”“Since the reformation from Popery, those who profess to admit these doctrines, and others necessarily connected with them, and forming a part of the same system, have been denominated Orthodox, while to those who openly reject them, or any considerable part of them, this appellation has been denied.“It is not to be inferred, however, that the Orthodox have been, or are, entirelyunanimouson the subject of religion. In matters comparatively unessential, and in their modes of[pg 135]stating, explaining, and establishing essential truths, there has always been more or less a diversity. Thus persons may disagree as to the form of church government, or as to the mode of administering ordinances, and yet have an equal claim to be entitled Orthodox. Or persons may disagree in their interpretation of particular passages of Scripture, and as to the manner in which these bear on the doctrines of religion, without forfeiting their title to the some honorable appellation. For instance, one person may regard a particular passage as proof conclusive of the divinity of Christ, while another may be in doubt respecting it, or may apply it differently, and yet both be firm believers in the divinity of Christ. Many passages which the old writers quoted as proof-texts, have, in the progress of critical science, been differently interpreted; and yet the evidence in support of the Orthodox system, so far from being weakened in this way, has been constantly gaining strength.“Again: persons may disagree, to a certain extent, at least, in their statements and explanations of the most essential doctrines, and yet be properly and equally Orthodox. In illustration of this remark, several examples will be given.“All Orthodox Christians believe in the full inspiration of the sacred Scriptures; or that the holy men, through whose instrumentality the world originally received these Scriptures, spake and wrote‘as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.’They believe in this as afactof the utmost importance. But there have been various modes of stating, explaining, and illustrating this fact. Some, for instance, have spoken of two or three kinds of inspiration; others have insisted that there can be but one kind; while others have thought it better to state the subject in general terms, without attempting very minutely to define or explain them.“All Orthodox Christians believe in the doctrine of the Trinity, or that the one God exists in a threefold distinction, commonly called persons,—the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. They believe this as a revealed fact, and as an essential part of the Christian doctrine. But how differently[pg 136]has this fact been stated by different individuals! What different explanations have been put upon it! While not a few have preferred to leave the subject—as God seems to have left it—altogether unexplained.“All Orthodox Christians believe in the universality of God's eternal purposes, in the certainty of their execution, and that they are so executed as not to obstruct or impair the free agency of man. But respecting themannerof God's executing his purposes,—whether by the instrumentality of motives, or by a direct efficiency,—persons having equal claims to the appellation of Orthodox, have not been agreed.“All the Orthodox believe in the natural and entire depravity of man; or that, in consequence of the sin of his first progenitors, and previous to regeneration, every thing within him, going to constitute moral character, is sinful. But how many theories have been framed to account for the connection of our sin with that of Adam! And how many explanations have been put upon the doctrine of entire depravity! Some have made this depravity to extend to all the powers of the soul; others have restricted it to our voluntary exercises and actions; while others have confined it chiefly to a moral taste, disposition, or instinct, which is regarded as back of our voluntary exercises, and the source of them.“All the Orthodox believe in the doctrine of atonement; but all do not state or explain this important doctrine after the same manner. Some suppose the atonement of Christ to consist wholly in his obedience, others wholly in his sufferings, and others in both his obedience and sufferings. Some hold that Christ suffered the penalty of the law for sinners, and others that he only opened a way in which, on condition of repentance, this penalty may be remitted. Some think the atonement made only for the elect, while others regard it as the propitiation for the sins of the whole world.“The doctrine of instantaneous regeneration by the special operations of the Holy Spirit, is believed by all who have any claim to be called Orthodox. But this doctrine, like the others mentioned, is variously stated and explained. Some[pg 137]consider man as entirely active in regeneration, others as entirely passive, and others as not entirely the one or the other. Some believe there is a holy principle implanted in regeneration, which ever afterwards remains in the heart of the subject, while others believe the change to consist in the commencement of holy exercises, which may be subsequently interrupted, though not finally lost. As to the manner in which the Spirit operates in regeneration, there is also a difference of opinion; some holding that he changes the heart by a direct efficiency, and others that this is done by the more powerful presentation and impression of motives.“Another doctrine of the Orthodox system is, that of justification by faith in Christ. But this, also, has been differently stated and explained. Some think the believer justified by Christ's righteousness, others by the influence of his sufferings and death, and others by the joint efficacy of both his obedience and sufferings. Some believe justification to be the same as forgiveness, while others regard it as implying, not only forgiveness, but also a title to eternal life.“It is evident, from the examples here given, that, although Orthodoxy denotes a general system of important doctrines or facts on the subject of religion, it is not to be inferred, either by friends or foes, that Orthodox Christians are tied up to precisely the same views of subjects, or that there exists no diversity of sentiment among them. There is, and always has been, a diversity of sentiment, in regard not only to modes and forms, but to the statement, proofs, and explanations, of the most important doctrines. Some of them, to be sure, are little more than verbal; but others arereal, are fitted to excite interest, and are entitled to very serious consideration. Still, as they are all held in avowed consistency with that great series of facts which go to constitute the Orthodox system, they should not be regarded as placing their advocates beyond the proper limits of Orthodoxy. They constitute a wide field of important discussion, over which those who agree in holding the Head,—in holding the great doctrines of redemption by the blood of Christ, and of sanctification[pg 138]by the Holy Spirit,—may freely and fraternally traverse. Modes and forms, the interpretation of passages, and explanations of particular doctrines, (so long as essential doctrines are not discarded,) may be discussed without the interruption of brotherly affection, and without the imputation and reproach of heresy. One person may hold that all Scripture is given by the inspiration ofsuggestion; and another that, while some parts are the fruit of immediate suggestion, others may more properly be attributed to the inspiration ofsuperintendence; and neither should charge the other with denying the inspiration of the Scriptures, or with being a heretic, or an infidel. One person may insist that the passage in 1 John 5:7, is authentic Scripture, and strong proof of the doctrine of the Trinity; and another may doubt this, or deny it altogether; and neither should be charged with intentionally corrupting the Scriptures, or with being a Unitarian. One person may hold that God executes his immutable and eternal decrees by a direct efficiency, and another that he does it by the intervention of motives, and yet one be no more an Arminian than the other.”Andover Orthodox Creed.Every person appointed or elected a professor in the Theological Institution at Andover, in the state of Massachusetts, shall, on the day of his inauguration into office, publicly make and subscribe the followingCreedandDeclaration:—Creed.“I believe that there is one, and but one, living and trueGod; that the word ofGod, contained in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament, is the only perfect rule of faith and practice; that, agreeably to those Scriptures,Godis a Spirit, infinite, eternal, and unchangeable, in his being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness, and truth; that in the Godhead are three Persons, theFather, theSon, and[pg 139]theHoly Ghost; and that thoseThreeareOneGOD, the same in substance, equal in power and glory; that God created man, after his own image, in knowledge, righteousness, and holiness; that the glory ofGodis man's chief end, and the enjoyment ofGodhis supreme happiness; that this enjoyment is derived solely from conformity of heart to the moral character and will ofGod; thatAdam, the federal head and representative of the human race, was placed in a state of probation, and that, in consequence of his disobedience, all his descendants were constituted sinners; that, by nature, every man is personally depraved, destitute of holiness, unlike and opposed toGod; and that, previously to the renewing agency of theDivine Spirit, all his moral actions are adverse to the character and glory ofGod; that, being morally incapable of recovering the image of hisCreator, which was lost inAdam, every man is justly exposed to eternal damnation; so that, except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom ofGod; thatGod, of his mere good pleasure, from all eternity, elected some to everlasting life, and that he entered into a covenant of grace, to deliver them out of this state of sin and misery by aRedeemer; that the onlyRedeemerof the elect is the eternalSonofGod, who, for this purpose, became man, and continues to beGodand man, in two distinct natures, and one person, forever; thatChrist, as our Redeemer, executeth the office of a Prophet, Priest, and King; that, agreeably to the covenant of redemption, theSonofGod, and he alone, by his sufferings and death, has made atonement for the sins of all men; that repentance, faith, and holiness, are the personal requisites in the gospel scheme of salvation; that the righteousness ofChristis the only ground of a sinner's justification; that this righteousness is received through faith; and that this faith is the gift ofGod; so that our salvation is wholly of grace; that no means whatever can change the heart of a sinner, and make it holy; that regeneration and sanctification are effects of the creating and renewing agency of theHoly Spirit, and that supreme love toGodconstitutes the essential[pg 140]difference between saints and sinners; that, by convincing us of our sin and misery, enlightening our minds, working faith in us, and renewing our wills, theHoly Spiritmakes us partakers of the benefits of redemption; and that the ordinary means by which these benefits are communicated to us, are the word, sacraments, and prayer; that repentance unto life, faith to feed uponChrist, love toGod, and new obedience, are the appropriate qualifications for the Lord's supper; and that a Christian church ought to admit no person to its holy communion, before he exhibit credible evidence of his godly sincerity; that perseverance in holiness is the only method of making our calling and election sure, and that the final perseverance of saints, though it is the effect of the special operation ofGodon their hearts, necessarily implies their own watchful diligence; that they who are effectually called, do, in this life, partake of justification, adoption, and sanctification, and the several benefits which do either accompany or flow from them; that the souls of believers are, at their death, made perfect in holiness, and do immediately pass into glory; that their bodies, being still united toChrist, will, at the resurrection, be raised up to glory, and that the saints will be made perfectly blessed in the full enjoyment ofGod, to all eternity: but that the wicked will awake to shame and everlasting contempt, and, with devils, be plunged into the lake that burneth with fire and brimstone forever and ever. I moreover believe thatGod, according to the counsel of his own will, and for his own glory, hath foreordained whatsoever comes to pass, and that all beings, actions, and events, both in the natural and moral world, are under his providential direction; thatGod'sdecrees perfectly consist with human liberty,God'suniversal agency with the agency of man, and man's dependence with his accountability; that man has understanding and corporeal strength to do all thatGodrequires of him; so that nothing but the sinner's aversion to holiness prevents his salvation; that it is the prerogative ofGodto bring good out of evil, and that he will cause the wrath and rage of wicked men[pg 141]and devils to praise him; and that all the evil which has existed, and will forever exist, in the moral system, will eventually be made to promote a most important purpose, under the wise and perfect administration of thatAlmighty Being, who will cause all things to work for his own glory, and thus fulfil all his pleasure.”Declaration.“And, furthermore, I do solemnly promise that I will open and explain the Scriptures to my pupils with integrity and faithfulness; that I will maintain and inculcate the Christian faith, as expressed in the creed, by me now repeated, together with all the other doctrines and duties of our holy religion, so far as may appertain to my office, according to the best lightGodshall give me, and in opposition, not only to Atheists and Infidels, but to Jews, Papists, Mahometans, Arians, Pelagians, Antinomians, Arminians, Socinians, Sabellians, Unitarians, and Universalists, and to all heresies and errors, ancient and modern, which may be opposed to the gospel ofChrist, or hazardous to the souls of men; that, by my instruction, counsel, and example, I will endeavor to promote true piety and godliness; that I will consult the good of thisInstitution, and the peace of the churches of our Lord Jesus Christ on all occasions; and that I will religiously conform to the constitution and laws of thisSeminary, and to the statutes of this foundation.”The foregoing creed is considered a summary of what is commonly called theAssembly's Catechism.TheWestminster Assemblymet in London, in the reign of Charles I, A. D. 1643. It was a synod of learned divines, assembled by order of parliament, for the purpose of settling the government, liturgy, and doctrine, of the church of England.[pg 142]New Haven Orthodox Creed.Considerable anxiety existed, a few years since, in regard to the Orthodoxy of the Rev. Dr.Taylor, professor of divinity at Yale College, at New Haven, in the state of Connecticut. The following letter from Dr.Taylorto the Rev. Dr.Hawes, of Hartford, contains a full exposition of the religious views of that distinguished theologian:—Yale College,Feb. 1, 1832.“Dear Brother:“I thank you for yours of the 23d ult., in which you express your approbation of my preaching during the protracted meetings at Hartford. This expression of fraternal confidence is grateful to me, not because I ever supposed that we differed in our views of the great doctrines of the gospel, but because, for some reason or other, an impression has been made, to some extent,that I am unsound in the faith. This impression, I feel bound to say, in my own view, is wholly groundless and unauthorized. You think, however, that‘I owe it to myself, to the institution with which I am connected, and to the Christian community, to make a frank and full statement of my views of some of the leading doctrines of the gospel, and that this cannot fail to relieve the minds of many, who are now suspicious of my Orthodoxy.’“Here I must be permitted to say, that the repeated and full statements of my opinions, which I have already made to the public, would seem to be sufficient to prevent or remove such suspicions. The course you propose, however, may furnish information to some who would desire it before they form an opinion, as well as the means of correcting the misrepresentations of others. I therefore readily comply with your request, and submit to your disposal the following statement of my belief on some of the leading doctrines of the gospel. I believe,—“1. That there are three persons in one God,—the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.[pg 143]“2. That the eternal purposes of God extend to all actual events, sin not excepted; or that God foreordains whatsoever comes to pass, and so executes these purposes, as to leave the free moral agency of man unimpaired.“3. That all mankind, in consequence of the fall of Adam, are born destitute of holiness, and are by nature totally depraved; in other words, that all men, from the commencement of moral agency, do, without the interposition of divine grace, sin, and only sin, in all their moral conduct.“4. That an atonement for sin has been made for all mankind by the Lord Jesus Christ; that this atonement was necessary to magnify the law, and to vindicate and unfold the justice of God in the pardon of sin; and that the sinner who believes in the Lord Jesus Christ is freely justified on the ground of his atoning sacrifice, and on that ground alone.“5. That the change in regeneration is amoralchange, consisting in a new, holy disposition, or governing purpose of the heart, as a permanent principle of action; in which change, the sinner transfers thesupremeaffection of his heart from all inferior objects to the living God, chooses him as the portion of his soul, and his service and glory as his supreme good, and thus, in respect to moral character, becomes anew man.“6. That this moral change is never produced in the human heart bymoral suasion, i. e., by the mere influence of truth and motives, as the Pelagians affirm, but is produced by the influence of the Holy Spirit, operating on the mind through the truth, and in perfect consistency with the nature of moral action, and laws of moral agency.“7. That all men (in the words of the article of your church) may accept of the offers of salvation freely made to them in the gospel, but that no one will do this, except he be drawn by the Father.“8. That the necessity of the influence of the Holy Spirit in regeneration results solely from the voluntary perverseness[pg 144]of the sinner's heart, or disinclination to serve God, which, while it leaves him a complete moral agent, and without excuse for neglecting his duty, suspends his actual salvation on the sovereign will of God.“9. That the renewing grace of God isspecial, in distinction from that which is common, and is resisted by the sinful mind, inasmuch as it is that which is designed to secure, and does infallibly secure, the conversion of the sinner.“10. That all who are renewed by the Holy Spirit are elected or chosen of God from eternity, that they should be holy, not on account of foreseen faith, or good works, but according to the good pleasure of his will.“11. That all who are renewed by the Holy Spirit, will, through his continual influence, persevere in holiness to the end, and obtain eternal life.“Such is my faith in respect to some of the lending doctrines of the gospel. These doctrines I preach; these I teach in the theological department of this Seminary; these I have repeatedly published to the world. With what truth or justice any regard me as a‘teacher of theology, introducing heresy into our churches,’the candid can judge.“But it may be asked, whether, after all, there are not some points on which I differ from my brethren generally, or, at least, from some of them. I answer,—It would be strange if any two man should be found to agree exactly in all the minute matters of religious opinion. With respect, however, to what is properly considered the Orthodox or Calvinisticsystemof doctrines, as including the greatfactsof Christianity, and as opposed to, and distinguished from, the Unitarian, Pelagian, and Arminiansystems, I suppose there is between the Orthodox ministry and myself an entire agreement. In respect to comparatively minor points, and philosophical theories, and modes of defending the Calvinistic system of doctrines, there has always been, as you are aware, a diversity of opinion, with freedom of discussion, among the Calvinists in this country, especially in New England, but which[pg 145]has never impaired their fellowship or mutual confidence. To these topics of difference, greater or less importance has been attached by different individuals. In respect to some of these, (and, in respect to them, I suppose myself to agree with a large majority of our Calvinistic clergy,) I will now briefly but frankly state what I donot, and what I do, believe.“I donotbelieve that the posterity of Adam are, in the proper sense of the language, guilty of his sin; or that the ill desert of that sin is truly theirs; or that they are punished for that sin. But I do believe that, by the wise and holy constitution of God, all mankind, in consequence of Adam's sin, become sinners by their own act.“I donotbelieve that the nature of the human mind, which God creates, is itself sinful; or that God punishes men for the nature which he creates; or that sin pertains to any thing in the mind which precedes all conscious mental exercise or action, and which is neither a matter of consciousness nor of knowledge. But I do believe that sin, universally, is no other than selfishness, or apreferenceof one's self to all others,—of some inferior good to God; that this free, voluntary preference is a permanent principle of action in all the unconverted; and that this is sin, and all that in the Scriptures is meant by sin. I also believe that such is thenatureof the human mind, that it becomes the occasion of universal sin in men in all the appropriate circumstances of their existence, and that, therefore, they are truly and properly said to be sinnersby nature.“I donotbelieve that sin can be proved to be the necessary means of the greatest good, and that, as such, God prefers it, on the whole, to holiness in its stead; or that a God of sincerity and truth punishes his creatures for doing that which he, on the whole, prefers they should do, and which, as the means of good, is the best thing they can do. But I do believe that holiness, as the means of good, may be better than sin; that it may be true that God, all things considered, prefers holiness to sin in all instances in which the latter takes place, and, therefore, sincerely desires that all men[pg 146]should come to repentance, though, for wise and good reasons, hepermits, or does not prevent, the existence of sin. I donotbelieve that it can be proved that an omnipotent God would beunableto secure more good by means of the perfect and universal obedience of his creatures, if they would render it, than by means of their sin. But I do believe that it may involve a dishonorable limitation of his power to suppose that he could not do it.3“I donotbelieve that the grace of God can be truly said to beirresistible, in the primary, proper import of this term. But I do believe that, in all cases, itmay beresisted by man as a free moral agent, and that, when it becomes effectual to conversion, as it infallibly does in the case of all the elect, it isunresisted.“I donotbelieve that the grace of God is necessary, as Arminians and some others maintain, to render man an accountable agent, and responsible for rejecting the offers of eternal life. But I do believe that man would be such an agent, and thus responsible, were no such grace afforded, and that otherwise‘grace would be no more grace.’“I donotbelieve that it is necessary that the sinner, in using the means of regeneration, should commit sin in order to become holy. But I do believe that, as a moral agent, he is qualified so to use these means, i. e., the truth of God when present to his mind, as to become holy at once; that he is authorized to believe that, through the grace of the Holy Spirit, thismay bedone; and that, except in so doing, he cannot be truly and properly said tousethe means of regeneration.“I donotbelieve that we are authorized to assure the sinner,[pg 147]as Arminians do, and some others also, that the Holy Spirit is always ready to convert him. But I do believe that we are authorized to assure any sinner that itmay be truethat the Holy Spirit is now ready to convert him;‘that Godperadventurewill now give him repentance;’and that thus, in view of the possible intervention of divine influence, we remove what would otherwise be a ground of fatal discouragement to the sinner, when we exhort him to immediate repentance.“I have dwelt the more on some of these particulars, because much pains has been taken, by some individuals, to make the impression that I have departed from the true faith respecting the influences of the Holy Spirit, even denying his influences altogether. So far is this from the fact, that, as you well know, no one attaches higher importance to this doctrine than I do, preaches it more decisively, or appreciates more highly its practical relations and bearings. In my own view, the power of the gospel on the mind of the sinner very much consists in the two great facts of his complete moral agency as the basis of his obligation, of his guilt, and of his duty;—and of his dependence on the sovereign grace of God, resulting from his voluntary perverseness in sin. Without the latter, we could, in my opinion, neither show the Christian what thanks he owes his Deliverer from sin, nor awaken the sinner to flee from the wrath to come. This doctrine seems to be indispensable to destroy the presumptuous reliance of the sinner on future repentance, as it shows him how fearfully he provokes an offended God to withhold the grace on which all depends. At the same time, one thing is indubitably certain, viz., that God never revealed the doctrine of the sinner's dependence on his Spirit, to present the sinner from doing his duty at once. God does not call sinners to instant compliance with the terms of life, and then assure them that such compliance is utterly out of the question, and to be wholly despaired of. The opposite impression, however, is not uncommon; and it is an error not less fatal to immediate repentance, than the fond hope of[pg 148]repenting hereafter. Both are to be destroyed; and he who does not preach the gospel in that manner which tends to destroy both, preaches it but imperfectly.“In the earlier revivals of this country, great prominence was given, in the preaching, to the doctrine of dependence, in the forms of regeneration, election, &c. This was what was to be expected from the Calvinistic preachers of the time, in view of the prevalence of Arminianism. In the more recent revivals, however, a similar prominence seems to be given to moral agency, in the forms of present obligation to duty, its present practicability, &c. The preaching, thus distinguished in its more prominent characteristics, has been undeniably owned and blessed by the Spirit of God, although we are very apt to believe that what is true of one kind of preaching at one time, must be true of it at another. Now, I believe that both the doctrines of dependence and moral accountability must beadmitted by the public mind, to secure upon that mind the full power of the gospel. I also believe that greater or lessprominenceshould be given to the one or the other of these doctrines, according to the prevailing state of public opinion. When, at the earlier periods alluded to, the doctrine of dependence was dwelt on chiefly, (I do not suppose exclusively,) the public mind believed enough—I might say too much—concerning the free moral agency of man, and had not so well learned as since to pervert the doctrine of dependence to justify the waiting attitude of a passive recipient. And, then, both doctrines told with power on the mind and the conscience, and, through God, were attended with great and happy results. But the prominence given to the doctrine of dependence, in preaching, was continued, until, if I mistake not, it so engrossed the public attention, and so obscured or weakened the doctrine of responsibility, that many fell into the opposite error of quietly waiting for God's interposition. Hence, when this prevailing error is again corrected by a more prominent exhibition of man's responsibility, in the form of immediate obligation, &c., the power of both doctrines is again combined on[pg 149]the public mind, and we see the same or even greater results in revivals of religion. Nor would it be strange if the latter kind of preaching should, in its turn, prevail so exclusively and so long, that the practical influence of the doctrine of dependence should be greatly impaired, to be followed with another dearth of revivals and a quiet reliance of sinful men on their own self-sufficiency. On this subject, I have often, in view of the tendency of the human mind to vacillate from one extreme to the other, expressed my apprehensions. In some of my brethren, whom I love and respect, I see what I esteem adisproportionedestimate of the importance of preaching dependence; in others, whom I equally respect, I see what I regard as adisproportionedestimate of the importance of preaching moral responsibility. In regard to myself, I can say that I have aimed, in this respect, rightly to divide the word of truth, and that those discourses in which I have best succeeded in bringing the two doctrines to bear, in their combined force, on the mind, have been more blessed to the awakening and conversion of sinners, than almost any others which I preach. When both doctrines are wisely and truly presented, the sinner has no resting-place. Ho cannot well avoid a sense of guilt while proposing to remain in his sins, for he sees that he is a free moral agent, under all the responsibilities of such an agent to immediate duty. He cannot well presume on his resolution of future repentance, for he sees that sovereign, injured grace may at once abandon him to hopeless sin. He is thus shut up to the faith,—to the immediate performance of his duty. In accordance with these views, I aim, in my instructions to those who are preparing for the ministry, to inculcate the importance of a consistent, well-proportioned exhibition of the two great doctrines of the sinner's dependence and responsibility, that, in this respect, they may hold the minds of their hearers under the full influence of that gospel which is the power of God to salvation.“I have thus stated, more minutely, perhaps, than you anticipated, my views and opinions. I could wish that they might be satisfactory to all our Orthodox brethren. I have[pg 150]no doubt that they will be to very many, and to some who have been alarmed by groundless rumors concerning my unsoundness in the faith. With respect to what I have calledleading doctrines, I regard these as among the cardinal truths of the Christian system. They are truths to which I attach the highest importance, and in which my faith is more and more confirmed, the more I examine the word of God. Tosomeof those of which I have spoken ascomparatively minor points, I attach a high importance in their practical bearings and doctrinal connections. They are points, however, in regard to which there is more or less diversity of opinion among the Orthodox; and, as it is not my intention nor my practice to denounce others as heretics, merely because they differ from me in these matters, so I should be pleased with the reciprocation of the like catholicism on their part.”
Predestinarians.Are those who believe that God, for his own glory, hath foreordained whatsoever comes to pass. (See Matt. 25:34. Rom. 8:29, 30. Eph. 1:3, 6, 11. 2 Tim. 1:9. 2 Thess. 11:13. 1 Pet. 1:1, 2. John 6:37; 17:2-24. Rev. 13:8; 17:8. Dan. 4:35. 1 Thess. 5:19. Matt. 11:26. Exod. 4:21. Prov. 16:4. Acts 13:48.)Orthodox Creeds.Orthodoxy literally signifiescorrect opinions. The word is generally used to denote those who are attached to the Trinitarian scheme of Christian doctrine.[pg 133]The following article is found in the“Spirit of the Pilgrims,”vol. v. No. 1, and is supposed to have been written by the late Rev.Benjamin B. Wisner, D. D., pastor of the Old South church, Boston.The following summary contains the more material parts of the Orthodox faith. Those who embrace this system believe,—“That, since the fall of Adam, men are, in their natural state, altogether destitute of true holiness, and entirely depraved.“That men, though thus depraved, are justly required to love God with all the heart, and justly punishable for disobedience; or, in other words, they are complete moral agents, proper subjects of moral government, and truly accountable to God for their actions.“That in the unspeakable wisdom and love of God was disclosed a plan of redemption for sinful men.“That, in the development of this plan, God saw fit to reveal so much concerning the nature and the mode of the divine existence, as that he is manifested to his creatures as the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost; and that these three, each partaking of all the attributes of the Deity, and being entitled to receive divine worship and adoration, are the one living and true God.“That the Son of God, laying aside the glory which he had with the Father from everlasting, came down from heaven, took upon himself man's nature, and by his humiliation, sufferings, and death, made an atonement for the sins of the world.“That, in consequence of this atonement, the offer of pardon and eternal life was freely made to all; so that those who truly repent of sin, and believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, will be saved.“That men are naturally so averse to God and holiness, that, if left to themselves, they reject the offers of salvation, and neither repent of sin nor truly believe in a Savior.[pg 134]“That God, being moved with infinite love and compassion, sends forth the Holy Spirit, according to his sovereign pleasure, by whose beneficent energy an innumerable multitude of the human family are renewed, sanctified, and prepared for heaven; while others are suffered to pursue the course which they have freely chosen, and in which they obstinately persevere till the day of salvation is past.“That God, in his providential dispensations, in the bestowment of his saving mercy, and in his universal government, exhibits his adorable perfections, in such a manner as will call forth the admiration and love of all holy beings forever.“That believers are justified by faith, through the efficacy of the atonement, so that all claims of human merit, and all grounds of boasting, are forever excluded.“That the law of God is perpetually binding upon all moral beings, and upon believers not less than other men, as a rule of life; and that no repentance is genuine unless it bring forth fruits meet for repentance, and no faith is saving unless it produce good works.“That those who have been renewed by the Spirit will be preserved by the power of God, and advanced in holiness unto final salvation. And,“That Christ, as the great King of the universe, the Lord and Proprietor of created beings, will judge the world at the last day, when the righteous will be received to life eternal, and the wicked will be consigned to endless punishment.”“Since the reformation from Popery, those who profess to admit these doctrines, and others necessarily connected with them, and forming a part of the same system, have been denominated Orthodox, while to those who openly reject them, or any considerable part of them, this appellation has been denied.“It is not to be inferred, however, that the Orthodox have been, or are, entirelyunanimouson the subject of religion. In matters comparatively unessential, and in their modes of[pg 135]stating, explaining, and establishing essential truths, there has always been more or less a diversity. Thus persons may disagree as to the form of church government, or as to the mode of administering ordinances, and yet have an equal claim to be entitled Orthodox. Or persons may disagree in their interpretation of particular passages of Scripture, and as to the manner in which these bear on the doctrines of religion, without forfeiting their title to the some honorable appellation. For instance, one person may regard a particular passage as proof conclusive of the divinity of Christ, while another may be in doubt respecting it, or may apply it differently, and yet both be firm believers in the divinity of Christ. Many passages which the old writers quoted as proof-texts, have, in the progress of critical science, been differently interpreted; and yet the evidence in support of the Orthodox system, so far from being weakened in this way, has been constantly gaining strength.“Again: persons may disagree, to a certain extent, at least, in their statements and explanations of the most essential doctrines, and yet be properly and equally Orthodox. In illustration of this remark, several examples will be given.“All Orthodox Christians believe in the full inspiration of the sacred Scriptures; or that the holy men, through whose instrumentality the world originally received these Scriptures, spake and wrote‘as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.’They believe in this as afactof the utmost importance. But there have been various modes of stating, explaining, and illustrating this fact. Some, for instance, have spoken of two or three kinds of inspiration; others have insisted that there can be but one kind; while others have thought it better to state the subject in general terms, without attempting very minutely to define or explain them.“All Orthodox Christians believe in the doctrine of the Trinity, or that the one God exists in a threefold distinction, commonly called persons,—the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. They believe this as a revealed fact, and as an essential part of the Christian doctrine. But how differently[pg 136]has this fact been stated by different individuals! What different explanations have been put upon it! While not a few have preferred to leave the subject—as God seems to have left it—altogether unexplained.“All Orthodox Christians believe in the universality of God's eternal purposes, in the certainty of their execution, and that they are so executed as not to obstruct or impair the free agency of man. But respecting themannerof God's executing his purposes,—whether by the instrumentality of motives, or by a direct efficiency,—persons having equal claims to the appellation of Orthodox, have not been agreed.“All the Orthodox believe in the natural and entire depravity of man; or that, in consequence of the sin of his first progenitors, and previous to regeneration, every thing within him, going to constitute moral character, is sinful. But how many theories have been framed to account for the connection of our sin with that of Adam! And how many explanations have been put upon the doctrine of entire depravity! Some have made this depravity to extend to all the powers of the soul; others have restricted it to our voluntary exercises and actions; while others have confined it chiefly to a moral taste, disposition, or instinct, which is regarded as back of our voluntary exercises, and the source of them.“All the Orthodox believe in the doctrine of atonement; but all do not state or explain this important doctrine after the same manner. Some suppose the atonement of Christ to consist wholly in his obedience, others wholly in his sufferings, and others in both his obedience and sufferings. Some hold that Christ suffered the penalty of the law for sinners, and others that he only opened a way in which, on condition of repentance, this penalty may be remitted. Some think the atonement made only for the elect, while others regard it as the propitiation for the sins of the whole world.“The doctrine of instantaneous regeneration by the special operations of the Holy Spirit, is believed by all who have any claim to be called Orthodox. But this doctrine, like the others mentioned, is variously stated and explained. Some[pg 137]consider man as entirely active in regeneration, others as entirely passive, and others as not entirely the one or the other. Some believe there is a holy principle implanted in regeneration, which ever afterwards remains in the heart of the subject, while others believe the change to consist in the commencement of holy exercises, which may be subsequently interrupted, though not finally lost. As to the manner in which the Spirit operates in regeneration, there is also a difference of opinion; some holding that he changes the heart by a direct efficiency, and others that this is done by the more powerful presentation and impression of motives.“Another doctrine of the Orthodox system is, that of justification by faith in Christ. But this, also, has been differently stated and explained. Some think the believer justified by Christ's righteousness, others by the influence of his sufferings and death, and others by the joint efficacy of both his obedience and sufferings. Some believe justification to be the same as forgiveness, while others regard it as implying, not only forgiveness, but also a title to eternal life.“It is evident, from the examples here given, that, although Orthodoxy denotes a general system of important doctrines or facts on the subject of religion, it is not to be inferred, either by friends or foes, that Orthodox Christians are tied up to precisely the same views of subjects, or that there exists no diversity of sentiment among them. There is, and always has been, a diversity of sentiment, in regard not only to modes and forms, but to the statement, proofs, and explanations, of the most important doctrines. Some of them, to be sure, are little more than verbal; but others arereal, are fitted to excite interest, and are entitled to very serious consideration. Still, as they are all held in avowed consistency with that great series of facts which go to constitute the Orthodox system, they should not be regarded as placing their advocates beyond the proper limits of Orthodoxy. They constitute a wide field of important discussion, over which those who agree in holding the Head,—in holding the great doctrines of redemption by the blood of Christ, and of sanctification[pg 138]by the Holy Spirit,—may freely and fraternally traverse. Modes and forms, the interpretation of passages, and explanations of particular doctrines, (so long as essential doctrines are not discarded,) may be discussed without the interruption of brotherly affection, and without the imputation and reproach of heresy. One person may hold that all Scripture is given by the inspiration ofsuggestion; and another that, while some parts are the fruit of immediate suggestion, others may more properly be attributed to the inspiration ofsuperintendence; and neither should charge the other with denying the inspiration of the Scriptures, or with being a heretic, or an infidel. One person may insist that the passage in 1 John 5:7, is authentic Scripture, and strong proof of the doctrine of the Trinity; and another may doubt this, or deny it altogether; and neither should be charged with intentionally corrupting the Scriptures, or with being a Unitarian. One person may hold that God executes his immutable and eternal decrees by a direct efficiency, and another that he does it by the intervention of motives, and yet one be no more an Arminian than the other.”Andover Orthodox Creed.Every person appointed or elected a professor in the Theological Institution at Andover, in the state of Massachusetts, shall, on the day of his inauguration into office, publicly make and subscribe the followingCreedandDeclaration:—Creed.“I believe that there is one, and but one, living and trueGod; that the word ofGod, contained in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament, is the only perfect rule of faith and practice; that, agreeably to those Scriptures,Godis a Spirit, infinite, eternal, and unchangeable, in his being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness, and truth; that in the Godhead are three Persons, theFather, theSon, and[pg 139]theHoly Ghost; and that thoseThreeareOneGOD, the same in substance, equal in power and glory; that God created man, after his own image, in knowledge, righteousness, and holiness; that the glory ofGodis man's chief end, and the enjoyment ofGodhis supreme happiness; that this enjoyment is derived solely from conformity of heart to the moral character and will ofGod; thatAdam, the federal head and representative of the human race, was placed in a state of probation, and that, in consequence of his disobedience, all his descendants were constituted sinners; that, by nature, every man is personally depraved, destitute of holiness, unlike and opposed toGod; and that, previously to the renewing agency of theDivine Spirit, all his moral actions are adverse to the character and glory ofGod; that, being morally incapable of recovering the image of hisCreator, which was lost inAdam, every man is justly exposed to eternal damnation; so that, except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom ofGod; thatGod, of his mere good pleasure, from all eternity, elected some to everlasting life, and that he entered into a covenant of grace, to deliver them out of this state of sin and misery by aRedeemer; that the onlyRedeemerof the elect is the eternalSonofGod, who, for this purpose, became man, and continues to beGodand man, in two distinct natures, and one person, forever; thatChrist, as our Redeemer, executeth the office of a Prophet, Priest, and King; that, agreeably to the covenant of redemption, theSonofGod, and he alone, by his sufferings and death, has made atonement for the sins of all men; that repentance, faith, and holiness, are the personal requisites in the gospel scheme of salvation; that the righteousness ofChristis the only ground of a sinner's justification; that this righteousness is received through faith; and that this faith is the gift ofGod; so that our salvation is wholly of grace; that no means whatever can change the heart of a sinner, and make it holy; that regeneration and sanctification are effects of the creating and renewing agency of theHoly Spirit, and that supreme love toGodconstitutes the essential[pg 140]difference between saints and sinners; that, by convincing us of our sin and misery, enlightening our minds, working faith in us, and renewing our wills, theHoly Spiritmakes us partakers of the benefits of redemption; and that the ordinary means by which these benefits are communicated to us, are the word, sacraments, and prayer; that repentance unto life, faith to feed uponChrist, love toGod, and new obedience, are the appropriate qualifications for the Lord's supper; and that a Christian church ought to admit no person to its holy communion, before he exhibit credible evidence of his godly sincerity; that perseverance in holiness is the only method of making our calling and election sure, and that the final perseverance of saints, though it is the effect of the special operation ofGodon their hearts, necessarily implies their own watchful diligence; that they who are effectually called, do, in this life, partake of justification, adoption, and sanctification, and the several benefits which do either accompany or flow from them; that the souls of believers are, at their death, made perfect in holiness, and do immediately pass into glory; that their bodies, being still united toChrist, will, at the resurrection, be raised up to glory, and that the saints will be made perfectly blessed in the full enjoyment ofGod, to all eternity: but that the wicked will awake to shame and everlasting contempt, and, with devils, be plunged into the lake that burneth with fire and brimstone forever and ever. I moreover believe thatGod, according to the counsel of his own will, and for his own glory, hath foreordained whatsoever comes to pass, and that all beings, actions, and events, both in the natural and moral world, are under his providential direction; thatGod'sdecrees perfectly consist with human liberty,God'suniversal agency with the agency of man, and man's dependence with his accountability; that man has understanding and corporeal strength to do all thatGodrequires of him; so that nothing but the sinner's aversion to holiness prevents his salvation; that it is the prerogative ofGodto bring good out of evil, and that he will cause the wrath and rage of wicked men[pg 141]and devils to praise him; and that all the evil which has existed, and will forever exist, in the moral system, will eventually be made to promote a most important purpose, under the wise and perfect administration of thatAlmighty Being, who will cause all things to work for his own glory, and thus fulfil all his pleasure.”Declaration.“And, furthermore, I do solemnly promise that I will open and explain the Scriptures to my pupils with integrity and faithfulness; that I will maintain and inculcate the Christian faith, as expressed in the creed, by me now repeated, together with all the other doctrines and duties of our holy religion, so far as may appertain to my office, according to the best lightGodshall give me, and in opposition, not only to Atheists and Infidels, but to Jews, Papists, Mahometans, Arians, Pelagians, Antinomians, Arminians, Socinians, Sabellians, Unitarians, and Universalists, and to all heresies and errors, ancient and modern, which may be opposed to the gospel ofChrist, or hazardous to the souls of men; that, by my instruction, counsel, and example, I will endeavor to promote true piety and godliness; that I will consult the good of thisInstitution, and the peace of the churches of our Lord Jesus Christ on all occasions; and that I will religiously conform to the constitution and laws of thisSeminary, and to the statutes of this foundation.”The foregoing creed is considered a summary of what is commonly called theAssembly's Catechism.TheWestminster Assemblymet in London, in the reign of Charles I, A. D. 1643. It was a synod of learned divines, assembled by order of parliament, for the purpose of settling the government, liturgy, and doctrine, of the church of England.[pg 142]New Haven Orthodox Creed.Considerable anxiety existed, a few years since, in regard to the Orthodoxy of the Rev. Dr.Taylor, professor of divinity at Yale College, at New Haven, in the state of Connecticut. The following letter from Dr.Taylorto the Rev. Dr.Hawes, of Hartford, contains a full exposition of the religious views of that distinguished theologian:—Yale College,Feb. 1, 1832.“Dear Brother:“I thank you for yours of the 23d ult., in which you express your approbation of my preaching during the protracted meetings at Hartford. This expression of fraternal confidence is grateful to me, not because I ever supposed that we differed in our views of the great doctrines of the gospel, but because, for some reason or other, an impression has been made, to some extent,that I am unsound in the faith. This impression, I feel bound to say, in my own view, is wholly groundless and unauthorized. You think, however, that‘I owe it to myself, to the institution with which I am connected, and to the Christian community, to make a frank and full statement of my views of some of the leading doctrines of the gospel, and that this cannot fail to relieve the minds of many, who are now suspicious of my Orthodoxy.’“Here I must be permitted to say, that the repeated and full statements of my opinions, which I have already made to the public, would seem to be sufficient to prevent or remove such suspicions. The course you propose, however, may furnish information to some who would desire it before they form an opinion, as well as the means of correcting the misrepresentations of others. I therefore readily comply with your request, and submit to your disposal the following statement of my belief on some of the leading doctrines of the gospel. I believe,—“1. That there are three persons in one God,—the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.[pg 143]“2. That the eternal purposes of God extend to all actual events, sin not excepted; or that God foreordains whatsoever comes to pass, and so executes these purposes, as to leave the free moral agency of man unimpaired.“3. That all mankind, in consequence of the fall of Adam, are born destitute of holiness, and are by nature totally depraved; in other words, that all men, from the commencement of moral agency, do, without the interposition of divine grace, sin, and only sin, in all their moral conduct.“4. That an atonement for sin has been made for all mankind by the Lord Jesus Christ; that this atonement was necessary to magnify the law, and to vindicate and unfold the justice of God in the pardon of sin; and that the sinner who believes in the Lord Jesus Christ is freely justified on the ground of his atoning sacrifice, and on that ground alone.“5. That the change in regeneration is amoralchange, consisting in a new, holy disposition, or governing purpose of the heart, as a permanent principle of action; in which change, the sinner transfers thesupremeaffection of his heart from all inferior objects to the living God, chooses him as the portion of his soul, and his service and glory as his supreme good, and thus, in respect to moral character, becomes anew man.“6. That this moral change is never produced in the human heart bymoral suasion, i. e., by the mere influence of truth and motives, as the Pelagians affirm, but is produced by the influence of the Holy Spirit, operating on the mind through the truth, and in perfect consistency with the nature of moral action, and laws of moral agency.“7. That all men (in the words of the article of your church) may accept of the offers of salvation freely made to them in the gospel, but that no one will do this, except he be drawn by the Father.“8. That the necessity of the influence of the Holy Spirit in regeneration results solely from the voluntary perverseness[pg 144]of the sinner's heart, or disinclination to serve God, which, while it leaves him a complete moral agent, and without excuse for neglecting his duty, suspends his actual salvation on the sovereign will of God.“9. That the renewing grace of God isspecial, in distinction from that which is common, and is resisted by the sinful mind, inasmuch as it is that which is designed to secure, and does infallibly secure, the conversion of the sinner.“10. That all who are renewed by the Holy Spirit are elected or chosen of God from eternity, that they should be holy, not on account of foreseen faith, or good works, but according to the good pleasure of his will.“11. That all who are renewed by the Holy Spirit, will, through his continual influence, persevere in holiness to the end, and obtain eternal life.“Such is my faith in respect to some of the lending doctrines of the gospel. These doctrines I preach; these I teach in the theological department of this Seminary; these I have repeatedly published to the world. With what truth or justice any regard me as a‘teacher of theology, introducing heresy into our churches,’the candid can judge.“But it may be asked, whether, after all, there are not some points on which I differ from my brethren generally, or, at least, from some of them. I answer,—It would be strange if any two man should be found to agree exactly in all the minute matters of religious opinion. With respect, however, to what is properly considered the Orthodox or Calvinisticsystemof doctrines, as including the greatfactsof Christianity, and as opposed to, and distinguished from, the Unitarian, Pelagian, and Arminiansystems, I suppose there is between the Orthodox ministry and myself an entire agreement. In respect to comparatively minor points, and philosophical theories, and modes of defending the Calvinistic system of doctrines, there has always been, as you are aware, a diversity of opinion, with freedom of discussion, among the Calvinists in this country, especially in New England, but which[pg 145]has never impaired their fellowship or mutual confidence. To these topics of difference, greater or less importance has been attached by different individuals. In respect to some of these, (and, in respect to them, I suppose myself to agree with a large majority of our Calvinistic clergy,) I will now briefly but frankly state what I donot, and what I do, believe.“I donotbelieve that the posterity of Adam are, in the proper sense of the language, guilty of his sin; or that the ill desert of that sin is truly theirs; or that they are punished for that sin. But I do believe that, by the wise and holy constitution of God, all mankind, in consequence of Adam's sin, become sinners by their own act.“I donotbelieve that the nature of the human mind, which God creates, is itself sinful; or that God punishes men for the nature which he creates; or that sin pertains to any thing in the mind which precedes all conscious mental exercise or action, and which is neither a matter of consciousness nor of knowledge. But I do believe that sin, universally, is no other than selfishness, or apreferenceof one's self to all others,—of some inferior good to God; that this free, voluntary preference is a permanent principle of action in all the unconverted; and that this is sin, and all that in the Scriptures is meant by sin. I also believe that such is thenatureof the human mind, that it becomes the occasion of universal sin in men in all the appropriate circumstances of their existence, and that, therefore, they are truly and properly said to be sinnersby nature.“I donotbelieve that sin can be proved to be the necessary means of the greatest good, and that, as such, God prefers it, on the whole, to holiness in its stead; or that a God of sincerity and truth punishes his creatures for doing that which he, on the whole, prefers they should do, and which, as the means of good, is the best thing they can do. But I do believe that holiness, as the means of good, may be better than sin; that it may be true that God, all things considered, prefers holiness to sin in all instances in which the latter takes place, and, therefore, sincerely desires that all men[pg 146]should come to repentance, though, for wise and good reasons, hepermits, or does not prevent, the existence of sin. I donotbelieve that it can be proved that an omnipotent God would beunableto secure more good by means of the perfect and universal obedience of his creatures, if they would render it, than by means of their sin. But I do believe that it may involve a dishonorable limitation of his power to suppose that he could not do it.3“I donotbelieve that the grace of God can be truly said to beirresistible, in the primary, proper import of this term. But I do believe that, in all cases, itmay beresisted by man as a free moral agent, and that, when it becomes effectual to conversion, as it infallibly does in the case of all the elect, it isunresisted.“I donotbelieve that the grace of God is necessary, as Arminians and some others maintain, to render man an accountable agent, and responsible for rejecting the offers of eternal life. But I do believe that man would be such an agent, and thus responsible, were no such grace afforded, and that otherwise‘grace would be no more grace.’“I donotbelieve that it is necessary that the sinner, in using the means of regeneration, should commit sin in order to become holy. But I do believe that, as a moral agent, he is qualified so to use these means, i. e., the truth of God when present to his mind, as to become holy at once; that he is authorized to believe that, through the grace of the Holy Spirit, thismay bedone; and that, except in so doing, he cannot be truly and properly said tousethe means of regeneration.“I donotbelieve that we are authorized to assure the sinner,[pg 147]as Arminians do, and some others also, that the Holy Spirit is always ready to convert him. But I do believe that we are authorized to assure any sinner that itmay be truethat the Holy Spirit is now ready to convert him;‘that Godperadventurewill now give him repentance;’and that thus, in view of the possible intervention of divine influence, we remove what would otherwise be a ground of fatal discouragement to the sinner, when we exhort him to immediate repentance.“I have dwelt the more on some of these particulars, because much pains has been taken, by some individuals, to make the impression that I have departed from the true faith respecting the influences of the Holy Spirit, even denying his influences altogether. So far is this from the fact, that, as you well know, no one attaches higher importance to this doctrine than I do, preaches it more decisively, or appreciates more highly its practical relations and bearings. In my own view, the power of the gospel on the mind of the sinner very much consists in the two great facts of his complete moral agency as the basis of his obligation, of his guilt, and of his duty;—and of his dependence on the sovereign grace of God, resulting from his voluntary perverseness in sin. Without the latter, we could, in my opinion, neither show the Christian what thanks he owes his Deliverer from sin, nor awaken the sinner to flee from the wrath to come. This doctrine seems to be indispensable to destroy the presumptuous reliance of the sinner on future repentance, as it shows him how fearfully he provokes an offended God to withhold the grace on which all depends. At the same time, one thing is indubitably certain, viz., that God never revealed the doctrine of the sinner's dependence on his Spirit, to present the sinner from doing his duty at once. God does not call sinners to instant compliance with the terms of life, and then assure them that such compliance is utterly out of the question, and to be wholly despaired of. The opposite impression, however, is not uncommon; and it is an error not less fatal to immediate repentance, than the fond hope of[pg 148]repenting hereafter. Both are to be destroyed; and he who does not preach the gospel in that manner which tends to destroy both, preaches it but imperfectly.“In the earlier revivals of this country, great prominence was given, in the preaching, to the doctrine of dependence, in the forms of regeneration, election, &c. This was what was to be expected from the Calvinistic preachers of the time, in view of the prevalence of Arminianism. In the more recent revivals, however, a similar prominence seems to be given to moral agency, in the forms of present obligation to duty, its present practicability, &c. The preaching, thus distinguished in its more prominent characteristics, has been undeniably owned and blessed by the Spirit of God, although we are very apt to believe that what is true of one kind of preaching at one time, must be true of it at another. Now, I believe that both the doctrines of dependence and moral accountability must beadmitted by the public mind, to secure upon that mind the full power of the gospel. I also believe that greater or lessprominenceshould be given to the one or the other of these doctrines, according to the prevailing state of public opinion. When, at the earlier periods alluded to, the doctrine of dependence was dwelt on chiefly, (I do not suppose exclusively,) the public mind believed enough—I might say too much—concerning the free moral agency of man, and had not so well learned as since to pervert the doctrine of dependence to justify the waiting attitude of a passive recipient. And, then, both doctrines told with power on the mind and the conscience, and, through God, were attended with great and happy results. But the prominence given to the doctrine of dependence, in preaching, was continued, until, if I mistake not, it so engrossed the public attention, and so obscured or weakened the doctrine of responsibility, that many fell into the opposite error of quietly waiting for God's interposition. Hence, when this prevailing error is again corrected by a more prominent exhibition of man's responsibility, in the form of immediate obligation, &c., the power of both doctrines is again combined on[pg 149]the public mind, and we see the same or even greater results in revivals of religion. Nor would it be strange if the latter kind of preaching should, in its turn, prevail so exclusively and so long, that the practical influence of the doctrine of dependence should be greatly impaired, to be followed with another dearth of revivals and a quiet reliance of sinful men on their own self-sufficiency. On this subject, I have often, in view of the tendency of the human mind to vacillate from one extreme to the other, expressed my apprehensions. In some of my brethren, whom I love and respect, I see what I esteem adisproportionedestimate of the importance of preaching dependence; in others, whom I equally respect, I see what I regard as adisproportionedestimate of the importance of preaching moral responsibility. In regard to myself, I can say that I have aimed, in this respect, rightly to divide the word of truth, and that those discourses in which I have best succeeded in bringing the two doctrines to bear, in their combined force, on the mind, have been more blessed to the awakening and conversion of sinners, than almost any others which I preach. When both doctrines are wisely and truly presented, the sinner has no resting-place. Ho cannot well avoid a sense of guilt while proposing to remain in his sins, for he sees that he is a free moral agent, under all the responsibilities of such an agent to immediate duty. He cannot well presume on his resolution of future repentance, for he sees that sovereign, injured grace may at once abandon him to hopeless sin. He is thus shut up to the faith,—to the immediate performance of his duty. In accordance with these views, I aim, in my instructions to those who are preparing for the ministry, to inculcate the importance of a consistent, well-proportioned exhibition of the two great doctrines of the sinner's dependence and responsibility, that, in this respect, they may hold the minds of their hearers under the full influence of that gospel which is the power of God to salvation.“I have thus stated, more minutely, perhaps, than you anticipated, my views and opinions. I could wish that they might be satisfactory to all our Orthodox brethren. I have[pg 150]no doubt that they will be to very many, and to some who have been alarmed by groundless rumors concerning my unsoundness in the faith. With respect to what I have calledleading doctrines, I regard these as among the cardinal truths of the Christian system. They are truths to which I attach the highest importance, and in which my faith is more and more confirmed, the more I examine the word of God. Tosomeof those of which I have spoken ascomparatively minor points, I attach a high importance in their practical bearings and doctrinal connections. They are points, however, in regard to which there is more or less diversity of opinion among the Orthodox; and, as it is not my intention nor my practice to denounce others as heretics, merely because they differ from me in these matters, so I should be pleased with the reciprocation of the like catholicism on their part.”
Predestinarians.Are those who believe that God, for his own glory, hath foreordained whatsoever comes to pass. (See Matt. 25:34. Rom. 8:29, 30. Eph. 1:3, 6, 11. 2 Tim. 1:9. 2 Thess. 11:13. 1 Pet. 1:1, 2. John 6:37; 17:2-24. Rev. 13:8; 17:8. Dan. 4:35. 1 Thess. 5:19. Matt. 11:26. Exod. 4:21. Prov. 16:4. Acts 13:48.)
Are those who believe that God, for his own glory, hath foreordained whatsoever comes to pass. (See Matt. 25:34. Rom. 8:29, 30. Eph. 1:3, 6, 11. 2 Tim. 1:9. 2 Thess. 11:13. 1 Pet. 1:1, 2. John 6:37; 17:2-24. Rev. 13:8; 17:8. Dan. 4:35. 1 Thess. 5:19. Matt. 11:26. Exod. 4:21. Prov. 16:4. Acts 13:48.)
Orthodox Creeds.Orthodoxy literally signifiescorrect opinions. The word is generally used to denote those who are attached to the Trinitarian scheme of Christian doctrine.[pg 133]The following article is found in the“Spirit of the Pilgrims,”vol. v. No. 1, and is supposed to have been written by the late Rev.Benjamin B. Wisner, D. D., pastor of the Old South church, Boston.The following summary contains the more material parts of the Orthodox faith. Those who embrace this system believe,—“That, since the fall of Adam, men are, in their natural state, altogether destitute of true holiness, and entirely depraved.“That men, though thus depraved, are justly required to love God with all the heart, and justly punishable for disobedience; or, in other words, they are complete moral agents, proper subjects of moral government, and truly accountable to God for their actions.“That in the unspeakable wisdom and love of God was disclosed a plan of redemption for sinful men.“That, in the development of this plan, God saw fit to reveal so much concerning the nature and the mode of the divine existence, as that he is manifested to his creatures as the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost; and that these three, each partaking of all the attributes of the Deity, and being entitled to receive divine worship and adoration, are the one living and true God.“That the Son of God, laying aside the glory which he had with the Father from everlasting, came down from heaven, took upon himself man's nature, and by his humiliation, sufferings, and death, made an atonement for the sins of the world.“That, in consequence of this atonement, the offer of pardon and eternal life was freely made to all; so that those who truly repent of sin, and believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, will be saved.“That men are naturally so averse to God and holiness, that, if left to themselves, they reject the offers of salvation, and neither repent of sin nor truly believe in a Savior.[pg 134]“That God, being moved with infinite love and compassion, sends forth the Holy Spirit, according to his sovereign pleasure, by whose beneficent energy an innumerable multitude of the human family are renewed, sanctified, and prepared for heaven; while others are suffered to pursue the course which they have freely chosen, and in which they obstinately persevere till the day of salvation is past.“That God, in his providential dispensations, in the bestowment of his saving mercy, and in his universal government, exhibits his adorable perfections, in such a manner as will call forth the admiration and love of all holy beings forever.“That believers are justified by faith, through the efficacy of the atonement, so that all claims of human merit, and all grounds of boasting, are forever excluded.“That the law of God is perpetually binding upon all moral beings, and upon believers not less than other men, as a rule of life; and that no repentance is genuine unless it bring forth fruits meet for repentance, and no faith is saving unless it produce good works.“That those who have been renewed by the Spirit will be preserved by the power of God, and advanced in holiness unto final salvation. And,“That Christ, as the great King of the universe, the Lord and Proprietor of created beings, will judge the world at the last day, when the righteous will be received to life eternal, and the wicked will be consigned to endless punishment.”“Since the reformation from Popery, those who profess to admit these doctrines, and others necessarily connected with them, and forming a part of the same system, have been denominated Orthodox, while to those who openly reject them, or any considerable part of them, this appellation has been denied.“It is not to be inferred, however, that the Orthodox have been, or are, entirelyunanimouson the subject of religion. In matters comparatively unessential, and in their modes of[pg 135]stating, explaining, and establishing essential truths, there has always been more or less a diversity. Thus persons may disagree as to the form of church government, or as to the mode of administering ordinances, and yet have an equal claim to be entitled Orthodox. Or persons may disagree in their interpretation of particular passages of Scripture, and as to the manner in which these bear on the doctrines of religion, without forfeiting their title to the some honorable appellation. For instance, one person may regard a particular passage as proof conclusive of the divinity of Christ, while another may be in doubt respecting it, or may apply it differently, and yet both be firm believers in the divinity of Christ. Many passages which the old writers quoted as proof-texts, have, in the progress of critical science, been differently interpreted; and yet the evidence in support of the Orthodox system, so far from being weakened in this way, has been constantly gaining strength.“Again: persons may disagree, to a certain extent, at least, in their statements and explanations of the most essential doctrines, and yet be properly and equally Orthodox. In illustration of this remark, several examples will be given.“All Orthodox Christians believe in the full inspiration of the sacred Scriptures; or that the holy men, through whose instrumentality the world originally received these Scriptures, spake and wrote‘as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.’They believe in this as afactof the utmost importance. But there have been various modes of stating, explaining, and illustrating this fact. Some, for instance, have spoken of two or three kinds of inspiration; others have insisted that there can be but one kind; while others have thought it better to state the subject in general terms, without attempting very minutely to define or explain them.“All Orthodox Christians believe in the doctrine of the Trinity, or that the one God exists in a threefold distinction, commonly called persons,—the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. They believe this as a revealed fact, and as an essential part of the Christian doctrine. But how differently[pg 136]has this fact been stated by different individuals! What different explanations have been put upon it! While not a few have preferred to leave the subject—as God seems to have left it—altogether unexplained.“All Orthodox Christians believe in the universality of God's eternal purposes, in the certainty of their execution, and that they are so executed as not to obstruct or impair the free agency of man. But respecting themannerof God's executing his purposes,—whether by the instrumentality of motives, or by a direct efficiency,—persons having equal claims to the appellation of Orthodox, have not been agreed.“All the Orthodox believe in the natural and entire depravity of man; or that, in consequence of the sin of his first progenitors, and previous to regeneration, every thing within him, going to constitute moral character, is sinful. But how many theories have been framed to account for the connection of our sin with that of Adam! And how many explanations have been put upon the doctrine of entire depravity! Some have made this depravity to extend to all the powers of the soul; others have restricted it to our voluntary exercises and actions; while others have confined it chiefly to a moral taste, disposition, or instinct, which is regarded as back of our voluntary exercises, and the source of them.“All the Orthodox believe in the doctrine of atonement; but all do not state or explain this important doctrine after the same manner. Some suppose the atonement of Christ to consist wholly in his obedience, others wholly in his sufferings, and others in both his obedience and sufferings. Some hold that Christ suffered the penalty of the law for sinners, and others that he only opened a way in which, on condition of repentance, this penalty may be remitted. Some think the atonement made only for the elect, while others regard it as the propitiation for the sins of the whole world.“The doctrine of instantaneous regeneration by the special operations of the Holy Spirit, is believed by all who have any claim to be called Orthodox. But this doctrine, like the others mentioned, is variously stated and explained. Some[pg 137]consider man as entirely active in regeneration, others as entirely passive, and others as not entirely the one or the other. Some believe there is a holy principle implanted in regeneration, which ever afterwards remains in the heart of the subject, while others believe the change to consist in the commencement of holy exercises, which may be subsequently interrupted, though not finally lost. As to the manner in which the Spirit operates in regeneration, there is also a difference of opinion; some holding that he changes the heart by a direct efficiency, and others that this is done by the more powerful presentation and impression of motives.“Another doctrine of the Orthodox system is, that of justification by faith in Christ. But this, also, has been differently stated and explained. Some think the believer justified by Christ's righteousness, others by the influence of his sufferings and death, and others by the joint efficacy of both his obedience and sufferings. Some believe justification to be the same as forgiveness, while others regard it as implying, not only forgiveness, but also a title to eternal life.“It is evident, from the examples here given, that, although Orthodoxy denotes a general system of important doctrines or facts on the subject of religion, it is not to be inferred, either by friends or foes, that Orthodox Christians are tied up to precisely the same views of subjects, or that there exists no diversity of sentiment among them. There is, and always has been, a diversity of sentiment, in regard not only to modes and forms, but to the statement, proofs, and explanations, of the most important doctrines. Some of them, to be sure, are little more than verbal; but others arereal, are fitted to excite interest, and are entitled to very serious consideration. Still, as they are all held in avowed consistency with that great series of facts which go to constitute the Orthodox system, they should not be regarded as placing their advocates beyond the proper limits of Orthodoxy. They constitute a wide field of important discussion, over which those who agree in holding the Head,—in holding the great doctrines of redemption by the blood of Christ, and of sanctification[pg 138]by the Holy Spirit,—may freely and fraternally traverse. Modes and forms, the interpretation of passages, and explanations of particular doctrines, (so long as essential doctrines are not discarded,) may be discussed without the interruption of brotherly affection, and without the imputation and reproach of heresy. One person may hold that all Scripture is given by the inspiration ofsuggestion; and another that, while some parts are the fruit of immediate suggestion, others may more properly be attributed to the inspiration ofsuperintendence; and neither should charge the other with denying the inspiration of the Scriptures, or with being a heretic, or an infidel. One person may insist that the passage in 1 John 5:7, is authentic Scripture, and strong proof of the doctrine of the Trinity; and another may doubt this, or deny it altogether; and neither should be charged with intentionally corrupting the Scriptures, or with being a Unitarian. One person may hold that God executes his immutable and eternal decrees by a direct efficiency, and another that he does it by the intervention of motives, and yet one be no more an Arminian than the other.”
Orthodoxy literally signifiescorrect opinions. The word is generally used to denote those who are attached to the Trinitarian scheme of Christian doctrine.
The following article is found in the“Spirit of the Pilgrims,”vol. v. No. 1, and is supposed to have been written by the late Rev.Benjamin B. Wisner, D. D., pastor of the Old South church, Boston.
The following summary contains the more material parts of the Orthodox faith. Those who embrace this system believe,—
“That, since the fall of Adam, men are, in their natural state, altogether destitute of true holiness, and entirely depraved.“That men, though thus depraved, are justly required to love God with all the heart, and justly punishable for disobedience; or, in other words, they are complete moral agents, proper subjects of moral government, and truly accountable to God for their actions.“That in the unspeakable wisdom and love of God was disclosed a plan of redemption for sinful men.“That, in the development of this plan, God saw fit to reveal so much concerning the nature and the mode of the divine existence, as that he is manifested to his creatures as the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost; and that these three, each partaking of all the attributes of the Deity, and being entitled to receive divine worship and adoration, are the one living and true God.“That the Son of God, laying aside the glory which he had with the Father from everlasting, came down from heaven, took upon himself man's nature, and by his humiliation, sufferings, and death, made an atonement for the sins of the world.“That, in consequence of this atonement, the offer of pardon and eternal life was freely made to all; so that those who truly repent of sin, and believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, will be saved.“That men are naturally so averse to God and holiness, that, if left to themselves, they reject the offers of salvation, and neither repent of sin nor truly believe in a Savior.[pg 134]“That God, being moved with infinite love and compassion, sends forth the Holy Spirit, according to his sovereign pleasure, by whose beneficent energy an innumerable multitude of the human family are renewed, sanctified, and prepared for heaven; while others are suffered to pursue the course which they have freely chosen, and in which they obstinately persevere till the day of salvation is past.“That God, in his providential dispensations, in the bestowment of his saving mercy, and in his universal government, exhibits his adorable perfections, in such a manner as will call forth the admiration and love of all holy beings forever.“That believers are justified by faith, through the efficacy of the atonement, so that all claims of human merit, and all grounds of boasting, are forever excluded.“That the law of God is perpetually binding upon all moral beings, and upon believers not less than other men, as a rule of life; and that no repentance is genuine unless it bring forth fruits meet for repentance, and no faith is saving unless it produce good works.“That those who have been renewed by the Spirit will be preserved by the power of God, and advanced in holiness unto final salvation. And,“That Christ, as the great King of the universe, the Lord and Proprietor of created beings, will judge the world at the last day, when the righteous will be received to life eternal, and the wicked will be consigned to endless punishment.”“Since the reformation from Popery, those who profess to admit these doctrines, and others necessarily connected with them, and forming a part of the same system, have been denominated Orthodox, while to those who openly reject them, or any considerable part of them, this appellation has been denied.“It is not to be inferred, however, that the Orthodox have been, or are, entirelyunanimouson the subject of religion. In matters comparatively unessential, and in their modes of[pg 135]stating, explaining, and establishing essential truths, there has always been more or less a diversity. Thus persons may disagree as to the form of church government, or as to the mode of administering ordinances, and yet have an equal claim to be entitled Orthodox. Or persons may disagree in their interpretation of particular passages of Scripture, and as to the manner in which these bear on the doctrines of religion, without forfeiting their title to the some honorable appellation. For instance, one person may regard a particular passage as proof conclusive of the divinity of Christ, while another may be in doubt respecting it, or may apply it differently, and yet both be firm believers in the divinity of Christ. Many passages which the old writers quoted as proof-texts, have, in the progress of critical science, been differently interpreted; and yet the evidence in support of the Orthodox system, so far from being weakened in this way, has been constantly gaining strength.“Again: persons may disagree, to a certain extent, at least, in their statements and explanations of the most essential doctrines, and yet be properly and equally Orthodox. In illustration of this remark, several examples will be given.“All Orthodox Christians believe in the full inspiration of the sacred Scriptures; or that the holy men, through whose instrumentality the world originally received these Scriptures, spake and wrote‘as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.’They believe in this as afactof the utmost importance. But there have been various modes of stating, explaining, and illustrating this fact. Some, for instance, have spoken of two or three kinds of inspiration; others have insisted that there can be but one kind; while others have thought it better to state the subject in general terms, without attempting very minutely to define or explain them.“All Orthodox Christians believe in the doctrine of the Trinity, or that the one God exists in a threefold distinction, commonly called persons,—the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. They believe this as a revealed fact, and as an essential part of the Christian doctrine. But how differently[pg 136]has this fact been stated by different individuals! What different explanations have been put upon it! While not a few have preferred to leave the subject—as God seems to have left it—altogether unexplained.“All Orthodox Christians believe in the universality of God's eternal purposes, in the certainty of their execution, and that they are so executed as not to obstruct or impair the free agency of man. But respecting themannerof God's executing his purposes,—whether by the instrumentality of motives, or by a direct efficiency,—persons having equal claims to the appellation of Orthodox, have not been agreed.“All the Orthodox believe in the natural and entire depravity of man; or that, in consequence of the sin of his first progenitors, and previous to regeneration, every thing within him, going to constitute moral character, is sinful. But how many theories have been framed to account for the connection of our sin with that of Adam! And how many explanations have been put upon the doctrine of entire depravity! Some have made this depravity to extend to all the powers of the soul; others have restricted it to our voluntary exercises and actions; while others have confined it chiefly to a moral taste, disposition, or instinct, which is regarded as back of our voluntary exercises, and the source of them.“All the Orthodox believe in the doctrine of atonement; but all do not state or explain this important doctrine after the same manner. Some suppose the atonement of Christ to consist wholly in his obedience, others wholly in his sufferings, and others in both his obedience and sufferings. Some hold that Christ suffered the penalty of the law for sinners, and others that he only opened a way in which, on condition of repentance, this penalty may be remitted. Some think the atonement made only for the elect, while others regard it as the propitiation for the sins of the whole world.“The doctrine of instantaneous regeneration by the special operations of the Holy Spirit, is believed by all who have any claim to be called Orthodox. But this doctrine, like the others mentioned, is variously stated and explained. Some[pg 137]consider man as entirely active in regeneration, others as entirely passive, and others as not entirely the one or the other. Some believe there is a holy principle implanted in regeneration, which ever afterwards remains in the heart of the subject, while others believe the change to consist in the commencement of holy exercises, which may be subsequently interrupted, though not finally lost. As to the manner in which the Spirit operates in regeneration, there is also a difference of opinion; some holding that he changes the heart by a direct efficiency, and others that this is done by the more powerful presentation and impression of motives.“Another doctrine of the Orthodox system is, that of justification by faith in Christ. But this, also, has been differently stated and explained. Some think the believer justified by Christ's righteousness, others by the influence of his sufferings and death, and others by the joint efficacy of both his obedience and sufferings. Some believe justification to be the same as forgiveness, while others regard it as implying, not only forgiveness, but also a title to eternal life.“It is evident, from the examples here given, that, although Orthodoxy denotes a general system of important doctrines or facts on the subject of religion, it is not to be inferred, either by friends or foes, that Orthodox Christians are tied up to precisely the same views of subjects, or that there exists no diversity of sentiment among them. There is, and always has been, a diversity of sentiment, in regard not only to modes and forms, but to the statement, proofs, and explanations, of the most important doctrines. Some of them, to be sure, are little more than verbal; but others arereal, are fitted to excite interest, and are entitled to very serious consideration. Still, as they are all held in avowed consistency with that great series of facts which go to constitute the Orthodox system, they should not be regarded as placing their advocates beyond the proper limits of Orthodoxy. They constitute a wide field of important discussion, over which those who agree in holding the Head,—in holding the great doctrines of redemption by the blood of Christ, and of sanctification[pg 138]by the Holy Spirit,—may freely and fraternally traverse. Modes and forms, the interpretation of passages, and explanations of particular doctrines, (so long as essential doctrines are not discarded,) may be discussed without the interruption of brotherly affection, and without the imputation and reproach of heresy. One person may hold that all Scripture is given by the inspiration ofsuggestion; and another that, while some parts are the fruit of immediate suggestion, others may more properly be attributed to the inspiration ofsuperintendence; and neither should charge the other with denying the inspiration of the Scriptures, or with being a heretic, or an infidel. One person may insist that the passage in 1 John 5:7, is authentic Scripture, and strong proof of the doctrine of the Trinity; and another may doubt this, or deny it altogether; and neither should be charged with intentionally corrupting the Scriptures, or with being a Unitarian. One person may hold that God executes his immutable and eternal decrees by a direct efficiency, and another that he does it by the intervention of motives, and yet one be no more an Arminian than the other.”
“That, since the fall of Adam, men are, in their natural state, altogether destitute of true holiness, and entirely depraved.
“That men, though thus depraved, are justly required to love God with all the heart, and justly punishable for disobedience; or, in other words, they are complete moral agents, proper subjects of moral government, and truly accountable to God for their actions.
“That in the unspeakable wisdom and love of God was disclosed a plan of redemption for sinful men.
“That, in the development of this plan, God saw fit to reveal so much concerning the nature and the mode of the divine existence, as that he is manifested to his creatures as the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost; and that these three, each partaking of all the attributes of the Deity, and being entitled to receive divine worship and adoration, are the one living and true God.
“That the Son of God, laying aside the glory which he had with the Father from everlasting, came down from heaven, took upon himself man's nature, and by his humiliation, sufferings, and death, made an atonement for the sins of the world.
“That, in consequence of this atonement, the offer of pardon and eternal life was freely made to all; so that those who truly repent of sin, and believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, will be saved.
“That men are naturally so averse to God and holiness, that, if left to themselves, they reject the offers of salvation, and neither repent of sin nor truly believe in a Savior.
“That God, being moved with infinite love and compassion, sends forth the Holy Spirit, according to his sovereign pleasure, by whose beneficent energy an innumerable multitude of the human family are renewed, sanctified, and prepared for heaven; while others are suffered to pursue the course which they have freely chosen, and in which they obstinately persevere till the day of salvation is past.
“That God, in his providential dispensations, in the bestowment of his saving mercy, and in his universal government, exhibits his adorable perfections, in such a manner as will call forth the admiration and love of all holy beings forever.
“That believers are justified by faith, through the efficacy of the atonement, so that all claims of human merit, and all grounds of boasting, are forever excluded.
“That the law of God is perpetually binding upon all moral beings, and upon believers not less than other men, as a rule of life; and that no repentance is genuine unless it bring forth fruits meet for repentance, and no faith is saving unless it produce good works.
“That those who have been renewed by the Spirit will be preserved by the power of God, and advanced in holiness unto final salvation. And,
“That Christ, as the great King of the universe, the Lord and Proprietor of created beings, will judge the world at the last day, when the righteous will be received to life eternal, and the wicked will be consigned to endless punishment.”
“Since the reformation from Popery, those who profess to admit these doctrines, and others necessarily connected with them, and forming a part of the same system, have been denominated Orthodox, while to those who openly reject them, or any considerable part of them, this appellation has been denied.
“It is not to be inferred, however, that the Orthodox have been, or are, entirelyunanimouson the subject of religion. In matters comparatively unessential, and in their modes of[pg 135]stating, explaining, and establishing essential truths, there has always been more or less a diversity. Thus persons may disagree as to the form of church government, or as to the mode of administering ordinances, and yet have an equal claim to be entitled Orthodox. Or persons may disagree in their interpretation of particular passages of Scripture, and as to the manner in which these bear on the doctrines of religion, without forfeiting their title to the some honorable appellation. For instance, one person may regard a particular passage as proof conclusive of the divinity of Christ, while another may be in doubt respecting it, or may apply it differently, and yet both be firm believers in the divinity of Christ. Many passages which the old writers quoted as proof-texts, have, in the progress of critical science, been differently interpreted; and yet the evidence in support of the Orthodox system, so far from being weakened in this way, has been constantly gaining strength.
“Again: persons may disagree, to a certain extent, at least, in their statements and explanations of the most essential doctrines, and yet be properly and equally Orthodox. In illustration of this remark, several examples will be given.
“All Orthodox Christians believe in the full inspiration of the sacred Scriptures; or that the holy men, through whose instrumentality the world originally received these Scriptures, spake and wrote‘as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.’They believe in this as afactof the utmost importance. But there have been various modes of stating, explaining, and illustrating this fact. Some, for instance, have spoken of two or three kinds of inspiration; others have insisted that there can be but one kind; while others have thought it better to state the subject in general terms, without attempting very minutely to define or explain them.
“All Orthodox Christians believe in the doctrine of the Trinity, or that the one God exists in a threefold distinction, commonly called persons,—the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. They believe this as a revealed fact, and as an essential part of the Christian doctrine. But how differently[pg 136]has this fact been stated by different individuals! What different explanations have been put upon it! While not a few have preferred to leave the subject—as God seems to have left it—altogether unexplained.
“All Orthodox Christians believe in the universality of God's eternal purposes, in the certainty of their execution, and that they are so executed as not to obstruct or impair the free agency of man. But respecting themannerof God's executing his purposes,—whether by the instrumentality of motives, or by a direct efficiency,—persons having equal claims to the appellation of Orthodox, have not been agreed.
“All the Orthodox believe in the natural and entire depravity of man; or that, in consequence of the sin of his first progenitors, and previous to regeneration, every thing within him, going to constitute moral character, is sinful. But how many theories have been framed to account for the connection of our sin with that of Adam! And how many explanations have been put upon the doctrine of entire depravity! Some have made this depravity to extend to all the powers of the soul; others have restricted it to our voluntary exercises and actions; while others have confined it chiefly to a moral taste, disposition, or instinct, which is regarded as back of our voluntary exercises, and the source of them.
“All the Orthodox believe in the doctrine of atonement; but all do not state or explain this important doctrine after the same manner. Some suppose the atonement of Christ to consist wholly in his obedience, others wholly in his sufferings, and others in both his obedience and sufferings. Some hold that Christ suffered the penalty of the law for sinners, and others that he only opened a way in which, on condition of repentance, this penalty may be remitted. Some think the atonement made only for the elect, while others regard it as the propitiation for the sins of the whole world.
“The doctrine of instantaneous regeneration by the special operations of the Holy Spirit, is believed by all who have any claim to be called Orthodox. But this doctrine, like the others mentioned, is variously stated and explained. Some[pg 137]consider man as entirely active in regeneration, others as entirely passive, and others as not entirely the one or the other. Some believe there is a holy principle implanted in regeneration, which ever afterwards remains in the heart of the subject, while others believe the change to consist in the commencement of holy exercises, which may be subsequently interrupted, though not finally lost. As to the manner in which the Spirit operates in regeneration, there is also a difference of opinion; some holding that he changes the heart by a direct efficiency, and others that this is done by the more powerful presentation and impression of motives.
“Another doctrine of the Orthodox system is, that of justification by faith in Christ. But this, also, has been differently stated and explained. Some think the believer justified by Christ's righteousness, others by the influence of his sufferings and death, and others by the joint efficacy of both his obedience and sufferings. Some believe justification to be the same as forgiveness, while others regard it as implying, not only forgiveness, but also a title to eternal life.
“It is evident, from the examples here given, that, although Orthodoxy denotes a general system of important doctrines or facts on the subject of religion, it is not to be inferred, either by friends or foes, that Orthodox Christians are tied up to precisely the same views of subjects, or that there exists no diversity of sentiment among them. There is, and always has been, a diversity of sentiment, in regard not only to modes and forms, but to the statement, proofs, and explanations, of the most important doctrines. Some of them, to be sure, are little more than verbal; but others arereal, are fitted to excite interest, and are entitled to very serious consideration. Still, as they are all held in avowed consistency with that great series of facts which go to constitute the Orthodox system, they should not be regarded as placing their advocates beyond the proper limits of Orthodoxy. They constitute a wide field of important discussion, over which those who agree in holding the Head,—in holding the great doctrines of redemption by the blood of Christ, and of sanctification[pg 138]by the Holy Spirit,—may freely and fraternally traverse. Modes and forms, the interpretation of passages, and explanations of particular doctrines, (so long as essential doctrines are not discarded,) may be discussed without the interruption of brotherly affection, and without the imputation and reproach of heresy. One person may hold that all Scripture is given by the inspiration ofsuggestion; and another that, while some parts are the fruit of immediate suggestion, others may more properly be attributed to the inspiration ofsuperintendence; and neither should charge the other with denying the inspiration of the Scriptures, or with being a heretic, or an infidel. One person may insist that the passage in 1 John 5:7, is authentic Scripture, and strong proof of the doctrine of the Trinity; and another may doubt this, or deny it altogether; and neither should be charged with intentionally corrupting the Scriptures, or with being a Unitarian. One person may hold that God executes his immutable and eternal decrees by a direct efficiency, and another that he does it by the intervention of motives, and yet one be no more an Arminian than the other.”
Andover Orthodox Creed.Every person appointed or elected a professor in the Theological Institution at Andover, in the state of Massachusetts, shall, on the day of his inauguration into office, publicly make and subscribe the followingCreedandDeclaration:—Creed.“I believe that there is one, and but one, living and trueGod; that the word ofGod, contained in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament, is the only perfect rule of faith and practice; that, agreeably to those Scriptures,Godis a Spirit, infinite, eternal, and unchangeable, in his being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness, and truth; that in the Godhead are three Persons, theFather, theSon, and[pg 139]theHoly Ghost; and that thoseThreeareOneGOD, the same in substance, equal in power and glory; that God created man, after his own image, in knowledge, righteousness, and holiness; that the glory ofGodis man's chief end, and the enjoyment ofGodhis supreme happiness; that this enjoyment is derived solely from conformity of heart to the moral character and will ofGod; thatAdam, the federal head and representative of the human race, was placed in a state of probation, and that, in consequence of his disobedience, all his descendants were constituted sinners; that, by nature, every man is personally depraved, destitute of holiness, unlike and opposed toGod; and that, previously to the renewing agency of theDivine Spirit, all his moral actions are adverse to the character and glory ofGod; that, being morally incapable of recovering the image of hisCreator, which was lost inAdam, every man is justly exposed to eternal damnation; so that, except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom ofGod; thatGod, of his mere good pleasure, from all eternity, elected some to everlasting life, and that he entered into a covenant of grace, to deliver them out of this state of sin and misery by aRedeemer; that the onlyRedeemerof the elect is the eternalSonofGod, who, for this purpose, became man, and continues to beGodand man, in two distinct natures, and one person, forever; thatChrist, as our Redeemer, executeth the office of a Prophet, Priest, and King; that, agreeably to the covenant of redemption, theSonofGod, and he alone, by his sufferings and death, has made atonement for the sins of all men; that repentance, faith, and holiness, are the personal requisites in the gospel scheme of salvation; that the righteousness ofChristis the only ground of a sinner's justification; that this righteousness is received through faith; and that this faith is the gift ofGod; so that our salvation is wholly of grace; that no means whatever can change the heart of a sinner, and make it holy; that regeneration and sanctification are effects of the creating and renewing agency of theHoly Spirit, and that supreme love toGodconstitutes the essential[pg 140]difference between saints and sinners; that, by convincing us of our sin and misery, enlightening our minds, working faith in us, and renewing our wills, theHoly Spiritmakes us partakers of the benefits of redemption; and that the ordinary means by which these benefits are communicated to us, are the word, sacraments, and prayer; that repentance unto life, faith to feed uponChrist, love toGod, and new obedience, are the appropriate qualifications for the Lord's supper; and that a Christian church ought to admit no person to its holy communion, before he exhibit credible evidence of his godly sincerity; that perseverance in holiness is the only method of making our calling and election sure, and that the final perseverance of saints, though it is the effect of the special operation ofGodon their hearts, necessarily implies their own watchful diligence; that they who are effectually called, do, in this life, partake of justification, adoption, and sanctification, and the several benefits which do either accompany or flow from them; that the souls of believers are, at their death, made perfect in holiness, and do immediately pass into glory; that their bodies, being still united toChrist, will, at the resurrection, be raised up to glory, and that the saints will be made perfectly blessed in the full enjoyment ofGod, to all eternity: but that the wicked will awake to shame and everlasting contempt, and, with devils, be plunged into the lake that burneth with fire and brimstone forever and ever. I moreover believe thatGod, according to the counsel of his own will, and for his own glory, hath foreordained whatsoever comes to pass, and that all beings, actions, and events, both in the natural and moral world, are under his providential direction; thatGod'sdecrees perfectly consist with human liberty,God'suniversal agency with the agency of man, and man's dependence with his accountability; that man has understanding and corporeal strength to do all thatGodrequires of him; so that nothing but the sinner's aversion to holiness prevents his salvation; that it is the prerogative ofGodto bring good out of evil, and that he will cause the wrath and rage of wicked men[pg 141]and devils to praise him; and that all the evil which has existed, and will forever exist, in the moral system, will eventually be made to promote a most important purpose, under the wise and perfect administration of thatAlmighty Being, who will cause all things to work for his own glory, and thus fulfil all his pleasure.”Declaration.“And, furthermore, I do solemnly promise that I will open and explain the Scriptures to my pupils with integrity and faithfulness; that I will maintain and inculcate the Christian faith, as expressed in the creed, by me now repeated, together with all the other doctrines and duties of our holy religion, so far as may appertain to my office, according to the best lightGodshall give me, and in opposition, not only to Atheists and Infidels, but to Jews, Papists, Mahometans, Arians, Pelagians, Antinomians, Arminians, Socinians, Sabellians, Unitarians, and Universalists, and to all heresies and errors, ancient and modern, which may be opposed to the gospel ofChrist, or hazardous to the souls of men; that, by my instruction, counsel, and example, I will endeavor to promote true piety and godliness; that I will consult the good of thisInstitution, and the peace of the churches of our Lord Jesus Christ on all occasions; and that I will religiously conform to the constitution and laws of thisSeminary, and to the statutes of this foundation.”The foregoing creed is considered a summary of what is commonly called theAssembly's Catechism.TheWestminster Assemblymet in London, in the reign of Charles I, A. D. 1643. It was a synod of learned divines, assembled by order of parliament, for the purpose of settling the government, liturgy, and doctrine, of the church of England.
Every person appointed or elected a professor in the Theological Institution at Andover, in the state of Massachusetts, shall, on the day of his inauguration into office, publicly make and subscribe the followingCreedandDeclaration:—
Creed.“I believe that there is one, and but one, living and trueGod; that the word ofGod, contained in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament, is the only perfect rule of faith and practice; that, agreeably to those Scriptures,Godis a Spirit, infinite, eternal, and unchangeable, in his being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness, and truth; that in the Godhead are three Persons, theFather, theSon, and[pg 139]theHoly Ghost; and that thoseThreeareOneGOD, the same in substance, equal in power and glory; that God created man, after his own image, in knowledge, righteousness, and holiness; that the glory ofGodis man's chief end, and the enjoyment ofGodhis supreme happiness; that this enjoyment is derived solely from conformity of heart to the moral character and will ofGod; thatAdam, the federal head and representative of the human race, was placed in a state of probation, and that, in consequence of his disobedience, all his descendants were constituted sinners; that, by nature, every man is personally depraved, destitute of holiness, unlike and opposed toGod; and that, previously to the renewing agency of theDivine Spirit, all his moral actions are adverse to the character and glory ofGod; that, being morally incapable of recovering the image of hisCreator, which was lost inAdam, every man is justly exposed to eternal damnation; so that, except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom ofGod; thatGod, of his mere good pleasure, from all eternity, elected some to everlasting life, and that he entered into a covenant of grace, to deliver them out of this state of sin and misery by aRedeemer; that the onlyRedeemerof the elect is the eternalSonofGod, who, for this purpose, became man, and continues to beGodand man, in two distinct natures, and one person, forever; thatChrist, as our Redeemer, executeth the office of a Prophet, Priest, and King; that, agreeably to the covenant of redemption, theSonofGod, and he alone, by his sufferings and death, has made atonement for the sins of all men; that repentance, faith, and holiness, are the personal requisites in the gospel scheme of salvation; that the righteousness ofChristis the only ground of a sinner's justification; that this righteousness is received through faith; and that this faith is the gift ofGod; so that our salvation is wholly of grace; that no means whatever can change the heart of a sinner, and make it holy; that regeneration and sanctification are effects of the creating and renewing agency of theHoly Spirit, and that supreme love toGodconstitutes the essential[pg 140]difference between saints and sinners; that, by convincing us of our sin and misery, enlightening our minds, working faith in us, and renewing our wills, theHoly Spiritmakes us partakers of the benefits of redemption; and that the ordinary means by which these benefits are communicated to us, are the word, sacraments, and prayer; that repentance unto life, faith to feed uponChrist, love toGod, and new obedience, are the appropriate qualifications for the Lord's supper; and that a Christian church ought to admit no person to its holy communion, before he exhibit credible evidence of his godly sincerity; that perseverance in holiness is the only method of making our calling and election sure, and that the final perseverance of saints, though it is the effect of the special operation ofGodon their hearts, necessarily implies their own watchful diligence; that they who are effectually called, do, in this life, partake of justification, adoption, and sanctification, and the several benefits which do either accompany or flow from them; that the souls of believers are, at their death, made perfect in holiness, and do immediately pass into glory; that their bodies, being still united toChrist, will, at the resurrection, be raised up to glory, and that the saints will be made perfectly blessed in the full enjoyment ofGod, to all eternity: but that the wicked will awake to shame and everlasting contempt, and, with devils, be plunged into the lake that burneth with fire and brimstone forever and ever. I moreover believe thatGod, according to the counsel of his own will, and for his own glory, hath foreordained whatsoever comes to pass, and that all beings, actions, and events, both in the natural and moral world, are under his providential direction; thatGod'sdecrees perfectly consist with human liberty,God'suniversal agency with the agency of man, and man's dependence with his accountability; that man has understanding and corporeal strength to do all thatGodrequires of him; so that nothing but the sinner's aversion to holiness prevents his salvation; that it is the prerogative ofGodto bring good out of evil, and that he will cause the wrath and rage of wicked men[pg 141]and devils to praise him; and that all the evil which has existed, and will forever exist, in the moral system, will eventually be made to promote a most important purpose, under the wise and perfect administration of thatAlmighty Being, who will cause all things to work for his own glory, and thus fulfil all his pleasure.”Declaration.“And, furthermore, I do solemnly promise that I will open and explain the Scriptures to my pupils with integrity and faithfulness; that I will maintain and inculcate the Christian faith, as expressed in the creed, by me now repeated, together with all the other doctrines and duties of our holy religion, so far as may appertain to my office, according to the best lightGodshall give me, and in opposition, not only to Atheists and Infidels, but to Jews, Papists, Mahometans, Arians, Pelagians, Antinomians, Arminians, Socinians, Sabellians, Unitarians, and Universalists, and to all heresies and errors, ancient and modern, which may be opposed to the gospel ofChrist, or hazardous to the souls of men; that, by my instruction, counsel, and example, I will endeavor to promote true piety and godliness; that I will consult the good of thisInstitution, and the peace of the churches of our Lord Jesus Christ on all occasions; and that I will religiously conform to the constitution and laws of thisSeminary, and to the statutes of this foundation.”
Creed.
“I believe that there is one, and but one, living and trueGod; that the word ofGod, contained in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament, is the only perfect rule of faith and practice; that, agreeably to those Scriptures,Godis a Spirit, infinite, eternal, and unchangeable, in his being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness, and truth; that in the Godhead are three Persons, theFather, theSon, and[pg 139]theHoly Ghost; and that thoseThreeareOneGOD, the same in substance, equal in power and glory; that God created man, after his own image, in knowledge, righteousness, and holiness; that the glory ofGodis man's chief end, and the enjoyment ofGodhis supreme happiness; that this enjoyment is derived solely from conformity of heart to the moral character and will ofGod; thatAdam, the federal head and representative of the human race, was placed in a state of probation, and that, in consequence of his disobedience, all his descendants were constituted sinners; that, by nature, every man is personally depraved, destitute of holiness, unlike and opposed toGod; and that, previously to the renewing agency of theDivine Spirit, all his moral actions are adverse to the character and glory ofGod; that, being morally incapable of recovering the image of hisCreator, which was lost inAdam, every man is justly exposed to eternal damnation; so that, except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom ofGod; thatGod, of his mere good pleasure, from all eternity, elected some to everlasting life, and that he entered into a covenant of grace, to deliver them out of this state of sin and misery by aRedeemer; that the onlyRedeemerof the elect is the eternalSonofGod, who, for this purpose, became man, and continues to beGodand man, in two distinct natures, and one person, forever; thatChrist, as our Redeemer, executeth the office of a Prophet, Priest, and King; that, agreeably to the covenant of redemption, theSonofGod, and he alone, by his sufferings and death, has made atonement for the sins of all men; that repentance, faith, and holiness, are the personal requisites in the gospel scheme of salvation; that the righteousness ofChristis the only ground of a sinner's justification; that this righteousness is received through faith; and that this faith is the gift ofGod; so that our salvation is wholly of grace; that no means whatever can change the heart of a sinner, and make it holy; that regeneration and sanctification are effects of the creating and renewing agency of theHoly Spirit, and that supreme love toGodconstitutes the essential[pg 140]difference between saints and sinners; that, by convincing us of our sin and misery, enlightening our minds, working faith in us, and renewing our wills, theHoly Spiritmakes us partakers of the benefits of redemption; and that the ordinary means by which these benefits are communicated to us, are the word, sacraments, and prayer; that repentance unto life, faith to feed uponChrist, love toGod, and new obedience, are the appropriate qualifications for the Lord's supper; and that a Christian church ought to admit no person to its holy communion, before he exhibit credible evidence of his godly sincerity; that perseverance in holiness is the only method of making our calling and election sure, and that the final perseverance of saints, though it is the effect of the special operation ofGodon their hearts, necessarily implies their own watchful diligence; that they who are effectually called, do, in this life, partake of justification, adoption, and sanctification, and the several benefits which do either accompany or flow from them; that the souls of believers are, at their death, made perfect in holiness, and do immediately pass into glory; that their bodies, being still united toChrist, will, at the resurrection, be raised up to glory, and that the saints will be made perfectly blessed in the full enjoyment ofGod, to all eternity: but that the wicked will awake to shame and everlasting contempt, and, with devils, be plunged into the lake that burneth with fire and brimstone forever and ever. I moreover believe thatGod, according to the counsel of his own will, and for his own glory, hath foreordained whatsoever comes to pass, and that all beings, actions, and events, both in the natural and moral world, are under his providential direction; thatGod'sdecrees perfectly consist with human liberty,God'suniversal agency with the agency of man, and man's dependence with his accountability; that man has understanding and corporeal strength to do all thatGodrequires of him; so that nothing but the sinner's aversion to holiness prevents his salvation; that it is the prerogative ofGodto bring good out of evil, and that he will cause the wrath and rage of wicked men[pg 141]and devils to praise him; and that all the evil which has existed, and will forever exist, in the moral system, will eventually be made to promote a most important purpose, under the wise and perfect administration of thatAlmighty Being, who will cause all things to work for his own glory, and thus fulfil all his pleasure.”
Declaration.
“And, furthermore, I do solemnly promise that I will open and explain the Scriptures to my pupils with integrity and faithfulness; that I will maintain and inculcate the Christian faith, as expressed in the creed, by me now repeated, together with all the other doctrines and duties of our holy religion, so far as may appertain to my office, according to the best lightGodshall give me, and in opposition, not only to Atheists and Infidels, but to Jews, Papists, Mahometans, Arians, Pelagians, Antinomians, Arminians, Socinians, Sabellians, Unitarians, and Universalists, and to all heresies and errors, ancient and modern, which may be opposed to the gospel ofChrist, or hazardous to the souls of men; that, by my instruction, counsel, and example, I will endeavor to promote true piety and godliness; that I will consult the good of thisInstitution, and the peace of the churches of our Lord Jesus Christ on all occasions; and that I will religiously conform to the constitution and laws of thisSeminary, and to the statutes of this foundation.”
The foregoing creed is considered a summary of what is commonly called theAssembly's Catechism.
TheWestminster Assemblymet in London, in the reign of Charles I, A. D. 1643. It was a synod of learned divines, assembled by order of parliament, for the purpose of settling the government, liturgy, and doctrine, of the church of England.
New Haven Orthodox Creed.Considerable anxiety existed, a few years since, in regard to the Orthodoxy of the Rev. Dr.Taylor, professor of divinity at Yale College, at New Haven, in the state of Connecticut. The following letter from Dr.Taylorto the Rev. Dr.Hawes, of Hartford, contains a full exposition of the religious views of that distinguished theologian:—Yale College,Feb. 1, 1832.“Dear Brother:“I thank you for yours of the 23d ult., in which you express your approbation of my preaching during the protracted meetings at Hartford. This expression of fraternal confidence is grateful to me, not because I ever supposed that we differed in our views of the great doctrines of the gospel, but because, for some reason or other, an impression has been made, to some extent,that I am unsound in the faith. This impression, I feel bound to say, in my own view, is wholly groundless and unauthorized. You think, however, that‘I owe it to myself, to the institution with which I am connected, and to the Christian community, to make a frank and full statement of my views of some of the leading doctrines of the gospel, and that this cannot fail to relieve the minds of many, who are now suspicious of my Orthodoxy.’“Here I must be permitted to say, that the repeated and full statements of my opinions, which I have already made to the public, would seem to be sufficient to prevent or remove such suspicions. The course you propose, however, may furnish information to some who would desire it before they form an opinion, as well as the means of correcting the misrepresentations of others. I therefore readily comply with your request, and submit to your disposal the following statement of my belief on some of the leading doctrines of the gospel. I believe,—“1. That there are three persons in one God,—the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.[pg 143]“2. That the eternal purposes of God extend to all actual events, sin not excepted; or that God foreordains whatsoever comes to pass, and so executes these purposes, as to leave the free moral agency of man unimpaired.“3. That all mankind, in consequence of the fall of Adam, are born destitute of holiness, and are by nature totally depraved; in other words, that all men, from the commencement of moral agency, do, without the interposition of divine grace, sin, and only sin, in all their moral conduct.“4. That an atonement for sin has been made for all mankind by the Lord Jesus Christ; that this atonement was necessary to magnify the law, and to vindicate and unfold the justice of God in the pardon of sin; and that the sinner who believes in the Lord Jesus Christ is freely justified on the ground of his atoning sacrifice, and on that ground alone.“5. That the change in regeneration is amoralchange, consisting in a new, holy disposition, or governing purpose of the heart, as a permanent principle of action; in which change, the sinner transfers thesupremeaffection of his heart from all inferior objects to the living God, chooses him as the portion of his soul, and his service and glory as his supreme good, and thus, in respect to moral character, becomes anew man.“6. That this moral change is never produced in the human heart bymoral suasion, i. e., by the mere influence of truth and motives, as the Pelagians affirm, but is produced by the influence of the Holy Spirit, operating on the mind through the truth, and in perfect consistency with the nature of moral action, and laws of moral agency.“7. That all men (in the words of the article of your church) may accept of the offers of salvation freely made to them in the gospel, but that no one will do this, except he be drawn by the Father.“8. That the necessity of the influence of the Holy Spirit in regeneration results solely from the voluntary perverseness[pg 144]of the sinner's heart, or disinclination to serve God, which, while it leaves him a complete moral agent, and without excuse for neglecting his duty, suspends his actual salvation on the sovereign will of God.“9. That the renewing grace of God isspecial, in distinction from that which is common, and is resisted by the sinful mind, inasmuch as it is that which is designed to secure, and does infallibly secure, the conversion of the sinner.“10. That all who are renewed by the Holy Spirit are elected or chosen of God from eternity, that they should be holy, not on account of foreseen faith, or good works, but according to the good pleasure of his will.“11. That all who are renewed by the Holy Spirit, will, through his continual influence, persevere in holiness to the end, and obtain eternal life.“Such is my faith in respect to some of the lending doctrines of the gospel. These doctrines I preach; these I teach in the theological department of this Seminary; these I have repeatedly published to the world. With what truth or justice any regard me as a‘teacher of theology, introducing heresy into our churches,’the candid can judge.“But it may be asked, whether, after all, there are not some points on which I differ from my brethren generally, or, at least, from some of them. I answer,—It would be strange if any two man should be found to agree exactly in all the minute matters of religious opinion. With respect, however, to what is properly considered the Orthodox or Calvinisticsystemof doctrines, as including the greatfactsof Christianity, and as opposed to, and distinguished from, the Unitarian, Pelagian, and Arminiansystems, I suppose there is between the Orthodox ministry and myself an entire agreement. In respect to comparatively minor points, and philosophical theories, and modes of defending the Calvinistic system of doctrines, there has always been, as you are aware, a diversity of opinion, with freedom of discussion, among the Calvinists in this country, especially in New England, but which[pg 145]has never impaired their fellowship or mutual confidence. To these topics of difference, greater or less importance has been attached by different individuals. In respect to some of these, (and, in respect to them, I suppose myself to agree with a large majority of our Calvinistic clergy,) I will now briefly but frankly state what I donot, and what I do, believe.“I donotbelieve that the posterity of Adam are, in the proper sense of the language, guilty of his sin; or that the ill desert of that sin is truly theirs; or that they are punished for that sin. But I do believe that, by the wise and holy constitution of God, all mankind, in consequence of Adam's sin, become sinners by their own act.“I donotbelieve that the nature of the human mind, which God creates, is itself sinful; or that God punishes men for the nature which he creates; or that sin pertains to any thing in the mind which precedes all conscious mental exercise or action, and which is neither a matter of consciousness nor of knowledge. But I do believe that sin, universally, is no other than selfishness, or apreferenceof one's self to all others,—of some inferior good to God; that this free, voluntary preference is a permanent principle of action in all the unconverted; and that this is sin, and all that in the Scriptures is meant by sin. I also believe that such is thenatureof the human mind, that it becomes the occasion of universal sin in men in all the appropriate circumstances of their existence, and that, therefore, they are truly and properly said to be sinnersby nature.“I donotbelieve that sin can be proved to be the necessary means of the greatest good, and that, as such, God prefers it, on the whole, to holiness in its stead; or that a God of sincerity and truth punishes his creatures for doing that which he, on the whole, prefers they should do, and which, as the means of good, is the best thing they can do. But I do believe that holiness, as the means of good, may be better than sin; that it may be true that God, all things considered, prefers holiness to sin in all instances in which the latter takes place, and, therefore, sincerely desires that all men[pg 146]should come to repentance, though, for wise and good reasons, hepermits, or does not prevent, the existence of sin. I donotbelieve that it can be proved that an omnipotent God would beunableto secure more good by means of the perfect and universal obedience of his creatures, if they would render it, than by means of their sin. But I do believe that it may involve a dishonorable limitation of his power to suppose that he could not do it.3“I donotbelieve that the grace of God can be truly said to beirresistible, in the primary, proper import of this term. But I do believe that, in all cases, itmay beresisted by man as a free moral agent, and that, when it becomes effectual to conversion, as it infallibly does in the case of all the elect, it isunresisted.“I donotbelieve that the grace of God is necessary, as Arminians and some others maintain, to render man an accountable agent, and responsible for rejecting the offers of eternal life. But I do believe that man would be such an agent, and thus responsible, were no such grace afforded, and that otherwise‘grace would be no more grace.’“I donotbelieve that it is necessary that the sinner, in using the means of regeneration, should commit sin in order to become holy. But I do believe that, as a moral agent, he is qualified so to use these means, i. e., the truth of God when present to his mind, as to become holy at once; that he is authorized to believe that, through the grace of the Holy Spirit, thismay bedone; and that, except in so doing, he cannot be truly and properly said tousethe means of regeneration.“I donotbelieve that we are authorized to assure the sinner,[pg 147]as Arminians do, and some others also, that the Holy Spirit is always ready to convert him. But I do believe that we are authorized to assure any sinner that itmay be truethat the Holy Spirit is now ready to convert him;‘that Godperadventurewill now give him repentance;’and that thus, in view of the possible intervention of divine influence, we remove what would otherwise be a ground of fatal discouragement to the sinner, when we exhort him to immediate repentance.“I have dwelt the more on some of these particulars, because much pains has been taken, by some individuals, to make the impression that I have departed from the true faith respecting the influences of the Holy Spirit, even denying his influences altogether. So far is this from the fact, that, as you well know, no one attaches higher importance to this doctrine than I do, preaches it more decisively, or appreciates more highly its practical relations and bearings. In my own view, the power of the gospel on the mind of the sinner very much consists in the two great facts of his complete moral agency as the basis of his obligation, of his guilt, and of his duty;—and of his dependence on the sovereign grace of God, resulting from his voluntary perverseness in sin. Without the latter, we could, in my opinion, neither show the Christian what thanks he owes his Deliverer from sin, nor awaken the sinner to flee from the wrath to come. This doctrine seems to be indispensable to destroy the presumptuous reliance of the sinner on future repentance, as it shows him how fearfully he provokes an offended God to withhold the grace on which all depends. At the same time, one thing is indubitably certain, viz., that God never revealed the doctrine of the sinner's dependence on his Spirit, to present the sinner from doing his duty at once. God does not call sinners to instant compliance with the terms of life, and then assure them that such compliance is utterly out of the question, and to be wholly despaired of. The opposite impression, however, is not uncommon; and it is an error not less fatal to immediate repentance, than the fond hope of[pg 148]repenting hereafter. Both are to be destroyed; and he who does not preach the gospel in that manner which tends to destroy both, preaches it but imperfectly.“In the earlier revivals of this country, great prominence was given, in the preaching, to the doctrine of dependence, in the forms of regeneration, election, &c. This was what was to be expected from the Calvinistic preachers of the time, in view of the prevalence of Arminianism. In the more recent revivals, however, a similar prominence seems to be given to moral agency, in the forms of present obligation to duty, its present practicability, &c. The preaching, thus distinguished in its more prominent characteristics, has been undeniably owned and blessed by the Spirit of God, although we are very apt to believe that what is true of one kind of preaching at one time, must be true of it at another. Now, I believe that both the doctrines of dependence and moral accountability must beadmitted by the public mind, to secure upon that mind the full power of the gospel. I also believe that greater or lessprominenceshould be given to the one or the other of these doctrines, according to the prevailing state of public opinion. When, at the earlier periods alluded to, the doctrine of dependence was dwelt on chiefly, (I do not suppose exclusively,) the public mind believed enough—I might say too much—concerning the free moral agency of man, and had not so well learned as since to pervert the doctrine of dependence to justify the waiting attitude of a passive recipient. And, then, both doctrines told with power on the mind and the conscience, and, through God, were attended with great and happy results. But the prominence given to the doctrine of dependence, in preaching, was continued, until, if I mistake not, it so engrossed the public attention, and so obscured or weakened the doctrine of responsibility, that many fell into the opposite error of quietly waiting for God's interposition. Hence, when this prevailing error is again corrected by a more prominent exhibition of man's responsibility, in the form of immediate obligation, &c., the power of both doctrines is again combined on[pg 149]the public mind, and we see the same or even greater results in revivals of religion. Nor would it be strange if the latter kind of preaching should, in its turn, prevail so exclusively and so long, that the practical influence of the doctrine of dependence should be greatly impaired, to be followed with another dearth of revivals and a quiet reliance of sinful men on their own self-sufficiency. On this subject, I have often, in view of the tendency of the human mind to vacillate from one extreme to the other, expressed my apprehensions. In some of my brethren, whom I love and respect, I see what I esteem adisproportionedestimate of the importance of preaching dependence; in others, whom I equally respect, I see what I regard as adisproportionedestimate of the importance of preaching moral responsibility. In regard to myself, I can say that I have aimed, in this respect, rightly to divide the word of truth, and that those discourses in which I have best succeeded in bringing the two doctrines to bear, in their combined force, on the mind, have been more blessed to the awakening and conversion of sinners, than almost any others which I preach. When both doctrines are wisely and truly presented, the sinner has no resting-place. Ho cannot well avoid a sense of guilt while proposing to remain in his sins, for he sees that he is a free moral agent, under all the responsibilities of such an agent to immediate duty. He cannot well presume on his resolution of future repentance, for he sees that sovereign, injured grace may at once abandon him to hopeless sin. He is thus shut up to the faith,—to the immediate performance of his duty. In accordance with these views, I aim, in my instructions to those who are preparing for the ministry, to inculcate the importance of a consistent, well-proportioned exhibition of the two great doctrines of the sinner's dependence and responsibility, that, in this respect, they may hold the minds of their hearers under the full influence of that gospel which is the power of God to salvation.“I have thus stated, more minutely, perhaps, than you anticipated, my views and opinions. I could wish that they might be satisfactory to all our Orthodox brethren. I have[pg 150]no doubt that they will be to very many, and to some who have been alarmed by groundless rumors concerning my unsoundness in the faith. With respect to what I have calledleading doctrines, I regard these as among the cardinal truths of the Christian system. They are truths to which I attach the highest importance, and in which my faith is more and more confirmed, the more I examine the word of God. Tosomeof those of which I have spoken ascomparatively minor points, I attach a high importance in their practical bearings and doctrinal connections. They are points, however, in regard to which there is more or less diversity of opinion among the Orthodox; and, as it is not my intention nor my practice to denounce others as heretics, merely because they differ from me in these matters, so I should be pleased with the reciprocation of the like catholicism on their part.”
Considerable anxiety existed, a few years since, in regard to the Orthodoxy of the Rev. Dr.Taylor, professor of divinity at Yale College, at New Haven, in the state of Connecticut. The following letter from Dr.Taylorto the Rev. Dr.Hawes, of Hartford, contains a full exposition of the religious views of that distinguished theologian:—
Yale College,Feb. 1, 1832.“Dear Brother:“I thank you for yours of the 23d ult., in which you express your approbation of my preaching during the protracted meetings at Hartford. This expression of fraternal confidence is grateful to me, not because I ever supposed that we differed in our views of the great doctrines of the gospel, but because, for some reason or other, an impression has been made, to some extent,that I am unsound in the faith. This impression, I feel bound to say, in my own view, is wholly groundless and unauthorized. You think, however, that‘I owe it to myself, to the institution with which I am connected, and to the Christian community, to make a frank and full statement of my views of some of the leading doctrines of the gospel, and that this cannot fail to relieve the minds of many, who are now suspicious of my Orthodoxy.’“Here I must be permitted to say, that the repeated and full statements of my opinions, which I have already made to the public, would seem to be sufficient to prevent or remove such suspicions. The course you propose, however, may furnish information to some who would desire it before they form an opinion, as well as the means of correcting the misrepresentations of others. I therefore readily comply with your request, and submit to your disposal the following statement of my belief on some of the leading doctrines of the gospel. I believe,—“1. That there are three persons in one God,—the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.[pg 143]“2. That the eternal purposes of God extend to all actual events, sin not excepted; or that God foreordains whatsoever comes to pass, and so executes these purposes, as to leave the free moral agency of man unimpaired.“3. That all mankind, in consequence of the fall of Adam, are born destitute of holiness, and are by nature totally depraved; in other words, that all men, from the commencement of moral agency, do, without the interposition of divine grace, sin, and only sin, in all their moral conduct.“4. That an atonement for sin has been made for all mankind by the Lord Jesus Christ; that this atonement was necessary to magnify the law, and to vindicate and unfold the justice of God in the pardon of sin; and that the sinner who believes in the Lord Jesus Christ is freely justified on the ground of his atoning sacrifice, and on that ground alone.“5. That the change in regeneration is amoralchange, consisting in a new, holy disposition, or governing purpose of the heart, as a permanent principle of action; in which change, the sinner transfers thesupremeaffection of his heart from all inferior objects to the living God, chooses him as the portion of his soul, and his service and glory as his supreme good, and thus, in respect to moral character, becomes anew man.“6. That this moral change is never produced in the human heart bymoral suasion, i. e., by the mere influence of truth and motives, as the Pelagians affirm, but is produced by the influence of the Holy Spirit, operating on the mind through the truth, and in perfect consistency with the nature of moral action, and laws of moral agency.“7. That all men (in the words of the article of your church) may accept of the offers of salvation freely made to them in the gospel, but that no one will do this, except he be drawn by the Father.“8. That the necessity of the influence of the Holy Spirit in regeneration results solely from the voluntary perverseness[pg 144]of the sinner's heart, or disinclination to serve God, which, while it leaves him a complete moral agent, and without excuse for neglecting his duty, suspends his actual salvation on the sovereign will of God.“9. That the renewing grace of God isspecial, in distinction from that which is common, and is resisted by the sinful mind, inasmuch as it is that which is designed to secure, and does infallibly secure, the conversion of the sinner.“10. That all who are renewed by the Holy Spirit are elected or chosen of God from eternity, that they should be holy, not on account of foreseen faith, or good works, but according to the good pleasure of his will.“11. That all who are renewed by the Holy Spirit, will, through his continual influence, persevere in holiness to the end, and obtain eternal life.“Such is my faith in respect to some of the lending doctrines of the gospel. These doctrines I preach; these I teach in the theological department of this Seminary; these I have repeatedly published to the world. With what truth or justice any regard me as a‘teacher of theology, introducing heresy into our churches,’the candid can judge.“But it may be asked, whether, after all, there are not some points on which I differ from my brethren generally, or, at least, from some of them. I answer,—It would be strange if any two man should be found to agree exactly in all the minute matters of religious opinion. With respect, however, to what is properly considered the Orthodox or Calvinisticsystemof doctrines, as including the greatfactsof Christianity, and as opposed to, and distinguished from, the Unitarian, Pelagian, and Arminiansystems, I suppose there is between the Orthodox ministry and myself an entire agreement. In respect to comparatively minor points, and philosophical theories, and modes of defending the Calvinistic system of doctrines, there has always been, as you are aware, a diversity of opinion, with freedom of discussion, among the Calvinists in this country, especially in New England, but which[pg 145]has never impaired their fellowship or mutual confidence. To these topics of difference, greater or less importance has been attached by different individuals. In respect to some of these, (and, in respect to them, I suppose myself to agree with a large majority of our Calvinistic clergy,) I will now briefly but frankly state what I donot, and what I do, believe.“I donotbelieve that the posterity of Adam are, in the proper sense of the language, guilty of his sin; or that the ill desert of that sin is truly theirs; or that they are punished for that sin. But I do believe that, by the wise and holy constitution of God, all mankind, in consequence of Adam's sin, become sinners by their own act.“I donotbelieve that the nature of the human mind, which God creates, is itself sinful; or that God punishes men for the nature which he creates; or that sin pertains to any thing in the mind which precedes all conscious mental exercise or action, and which is neither a matter of consciousness nor of knowledge. But I do believe that sin, universally, is no other than selfishness, or apreferenceof one's self to all others,—of some inferior good to God; that this free, voluntary preference is a permanent principle of action in all the unconverted; and that this is sin, and all that in the Scriptures is meant by sin. I also believe that such is thenatureof the human mind, that it becomes the occasion of universal sin in men in all the appropriate circumstances of their existence, and that, therefore, they are truly and properly said to be sinnersby nature.“I donotbelieve that sin can be proved to be the necessary means of the greatest good, and that, as such, God prefers it, on the whole, to holiness in its stead; or that a God of sincerity and truth punishes his creatures for doing that which he, on the whole, prefers they should do, and which, as the means of good, is the best thing they can do. But I do believe that holiness, as the means of good, may be better than sin; that it may be true that God, all things considered, prefers holiness to sin in all instances in which the latter takes place, and, therefore, sincerely desires that all men[pg 146]should come to repentance, though, for wise and good reasons, hepermits, or does not prevent, the existence of sin. I donotbelieve that it can be proved that an omnipotent God would beunableto secure more good by means of the perfect and universal obedience of his creatures, if they would render it, than by means of their sin. But I do believe that it may involve a dishonorable limitation of his power to suppose that he could not do it.3“I donotbelieve that the grace of God can be truly said to beirresistible, in the primary, proper import of this term. But I do believe that, in all cases, itmay beresisted by man as a free moral agent, and that, when it becomes effectual to conversion, as it infallibly does in the case of all the elect, it isunresisted.“I donotbelieve that the grace of God is necessary, as Arminians and some others maintain, to render man an accountable agent, and responsible for rejecting the offers of eternal life. But I do believe that man would be such an agent, and thus responsible, were no such grace afforded, and that otherwise‘grace would be no more grace.’“I donotbelieve that it is necessary that the sinner, in using the means of regeneration, should commit sin in order to become holy. But I do believe that, as a moral agent, he is qualified so to use these means, i. e., the truth of God when present to his mind, as to become holy at once; that he is authorized to believe that, through the grace of the Holy Spirit, thismay bedone; and that, except in so doing, he cannot be truly and properly said tousethe means of regeneration.“I donotbelieve that we are authorized to assure the sinner,[pg 147]as Arminians do, and some others also, that the Holy Spirit is always ready to convert him. But I do believe that we are authorized to assure any sinner that itmay be truethat the Holy Spirit is now ready to convert him;‘that Godperadventurewill now give him repentance;’and that thus, in view of the possible intervention of divine influence, we remove what would otherwise be a ground of fatal discouragement to the sinner, when we exhort him to immediate repentance.“I have dwelt the more on some of these particulars, because much pains has been taken, by some individuals, to make the impression that I have departed from the true faith respecting the influences of the Holy Spirit, even denying his influences altogether. So far is this from the fact, that, as you well know, no one attaches higher importance to this doctrine than I do, preaches it more decisively, or appreciates more highly its practical relations and bearings. In my own view, the power of the gospel on the mind of the sinner very much consists in the two great facts of his complete moral agency as the basis of his obligation, of his guilt, and of his duty;—and of his dependence on the sovereign grace of God, resulting from his voluntary perverseness in sin. Without the latter, we could, in my opinion, neither show the Christian what thanks he owes his Deliverer from sin, nor awaken the sinner to flee from the wrath to come. This doctrine seems to be indispensable to destroy the presumptuous reliance of the sinner on future repentance, as it shows him how fearfully he provokes an offended God to withhold the grace on which all depends. At the same time, one thing is indubitably certain, viz., that God never revealed the doctrine of the sinner's dependence on his Spirit, to present the sinner from doing his duty at once. God does not call sinners to instant compliance with the terms of life, and then assure them that such compliance is utterly out of the question, and to be wholly despaired of. The opposite impression, however, is not uncommon; and it is an error not less fatal to immediate repentance, than the fond hope of[pg 148]repenting hereafter. Both are to be destroyed; and he who does not preach the gospel in that manner which tends to destroy both, preaches it but imperfectly.“In the earlier revivals of this country, great prominence was given, in the preaching, to the doctrine of dependence, in the forms of regeneration, election, &c. This was what was to be expected from the Calvinistic preachers of the time, in view of the prevalence of Arminianism. In the more recent revivals, however, a similar prominence seems to be given to moral agency, in the forms of present obligation to duty, its present practicability, &c. The preaching, thus distinguished in its more prominent characteristics, has been undeniably owned and blessed by the Spirit of God, although we are very apt to believe that what is true of one kind of preaching at one time, must be true of it at another. Now, I believe that both the doctrines of dependence and moral accountability must beadmitted by the public mind, to secure upon that mind the full power of the gospel. I also believe that greater or lessprominenceshould be given to the one or the other of these doctrines, according to the prevailing state of public opinion. When, at the earlier periods alluded to, the doctrine of dependence was dwelt on chiefly, (I do not suppose exclusively,) the public mind believed enough—I might say too much—concerning the free moral agency of man, and had not so well learned as since to pervert the doctrine of dependence to justify the waiting attitude of a passive recipient. And, then, both doctrines told with power on the mind and the conscience, and, through God, were attended with great and happy results. But the prominence given to the doctrine of dependence, in preaching, was continued, until, if I mistake not, it so engrossed the public attention, and so obscured or weakened the doctrine of responsibility, that many fell into the opposite error of quietly waiting for God's interposition. Hence, when this prevailing error is again corrected by a more prominent exhibition of man's responsibility, in the form of immediate obligation, &c., the power of both doctrines is again combined on[pg 149]the public mind, and we see the same or even greater results in revivals of religion. Nor would it be strange if the latter kind of preaching should, in its turn, prevail so exclusively and so long, that the practical influence of the doctrine of dependence should be greatly impaired, to be followed with another dearth of revivals and a quiet reliance of sinful men on their own self-sufficiency. On this subject, I have often, in view of the tendency of the human mind to vacillate from one extreme to the other, expressed my apprehensions. In some of my brethren, whom I love and respect, I see what I esteem adisproportionedestimate of the importance of preaching dependence; in others, whom I equally respect, I see what I regard as adisproportionedestimate of the importance of preaching moral responsibility. In regard to myself, I can say that I have aimed, in this respect, rightly to divide the word of truth, and that those discourses in which I have best succeeded in bringing the two doctrines to bear, in their combined force, on the mind, have been more blessed to the awakening and conversion of sinners, than almost any others which I preach. When both doctrines are wisely and truly presented, the sinner has no resting-place. Ho cannot well avoid a sense of guilt while proposing to remain in his sins, for he sees that he is a free moral agent, under all the responsibilities of such an agent to immediate duty. He cannot well presume on his resolution of future repentance, for he sees that sovereign, injured grace may at once abandon him to hopeless sin. He is thus shut up to the faith,—to the immediate performance of his duty. In accordance with these views, I aim, in my instructions to those who are preparing for the ministry, to inculcate the importance of a consistent, well-proportioned exhibition of the two great doctrines of the sinner's dependence and responsibility, that, in this respect, they may hold the minds of their hearers under the full influence of that gospel which is the power of God to salvation.“I have thus stated, more minutely, perhaps, than you anticipated, my views and opinions. I could wish that they might be satisfactory to all our Orthodox brethren. I have[pg 150]no doubt that they will be to very many, and to some who have been alarmed by groundless rumors concerning my unsoundness in the faith. With respect to what I have calledleading doctrines, I regard these as among the cardinal truths of the Christian system. They are truths to which I attach the highest importance, and in which my faith is more and more confirmed, the more I examine the word of God. Tosomeof those of which I have spoken ascomparatively minor points, I attach a high importance in their practical bearings and doctrinal connections. They are points, however, in regard to which there is more or less diversity of opinion among the Orthodox; and, as it is not my intention nor my practice to denounce others as heretics, merely because they differ from me in these matters, so I should be pleased with the reciprocation of the like catholicism on their part.”
Yale College,Feb. 1, 1832.
“Dear Brother:
“I thank you for yours of the 23d ult., in which you express your approbation of my preaching during the protracted meetings at Hartford. This expression of fraternal confidence is grateful to me, not because I ever supposed that we differed in our views of the great doctrines of the gospel, but because, for some reason or other, an impression has been made, to some extent,that I am unsound in the faith. This impression, I feel bound to say, in my own view, is wholly groundless and unauthorized. You think, however, that‘I owe it to myself, to the institution with which I am connected, and to the Christian community, to make a frank and full statement of my views of some of the leading doctrines of the gospel, and that this cannot fail to relieve the minds of many, who are now suspicious of my Orthodoxy.’
“Here I must be permitted to say, that the repeated and full statements of my opinions, which I have already made to the public, would seem to be sufficient to prevent or remove such suspicions. The course you propose, however, may furnish information to some who would desire it before they form an opinion, as well as the means of correcting the misrepresentations of others. I therefore readily comply with your request, and submit to your disposal the following statement of my belief on some of the leading doctrines of the gospel. I believe,—
“1. That there are three persons in one God,—the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.
“2. That the eternal purposes of God extend to all actual events, sin not excepted; or that God foreordains whatsoever comes to pass, and so executes these purposes, as to leave the free moral agency of man unimpaired.
“3. That all mankind, in consequence of the fall of Adam, are born destitute of holiness, and are by nature totally depraved; in other words, that all men, from the commencement of moral agency, do, without the interposition of divine grace, sin, and only sin, in all their moral conduct.
“4. That an atonement for sin has been made for all mankind by the Lord Jesus Christ; that this atonement was necessary to magnify the law, and to vindicate and unfold the justice of God in the pardon of sin; and that the sinner who believes in the Lord Jesus Christ is freely justified on the ground of his atoning sacrifice, and on that ground alone.
“5. That the change in regeneration is amoralchange, consisting in a new, holy disposition, or governing purpose of the heart, as a permanent principle of action; in which change, the sinner transfers thesupremeaffection of his heart from all inferior objects to the living God, chooses him as the portion of his soul, and his service and glory as his supreme good, and thus, in respect to moral character, becomes anew man.
“6. That this moral change is never produced in the human heart bymoral suasion, i. e., by the mere influence of truth and motives, as the Pelagians affirm, but is produced by the influence of the Holy Spirit, operating on the mind through the truth, and in perfect consistency with the nature of moral action, and laws of moral agency.
“7. That all men (in the words of the article of your church) may accept of the offers of salvation freely made to them in the gospel, but that no one will do this, except he be drawn by the Father.
“8. That the necessity of the influence of the Holy Spirit in regeneration results solely from the voluntary perverseness[pg 144]of the sinner's heart, or disinclination to serve God, which, while it leaves him a complete moral agent, and without excuse for neglecting his duty, suspends his actual salvation on the sovereign will of God.
“9. That the renewing grace of God isspecial, in distinction from that which is common, and is resisted by the sinful mind, inasmuch as it is that which is designed to secure, and does infallibly secure, the conversion of the sinner.
“10. That all who are renewed by the Holy Spirit are elected or chosen of God from eternity, that they should be holy, not on account of foreseen faith, or good works, but according to the good pleasure of his will.
“11. That all who are renewed by the Holy Spirit, will, through his continual influence, persevere in holiness to the end, and obtain eternal life.
“Such is my faith in respect to some of the lending doctrines of the gospel. These doctrines I preach; these I teach in the theological department of this Seminary; these I have repeatedly published to the world. With what truth or justice any regard me as a‘teacher of theology, introducing heresy into our churches,’the candid can judge.
“But it may be asked, whether, after all, there are not some points on which I differ from my brethren generally, or, at least, from some of them. I answer,—It would be strange if any two man should be found to agree exactly in all the minute matters of religious opinion. With respect, however, to what is properly considered the Orthodox or Calvinisticsystemof doctrines, as including the greatfactsof Christianity, and as opposed to, and distinguished from, the Unitarian, Pelagian, and Arminiansystems, I suppose there is between the Orthodox ministry and myself an entire agreement. In respect to comparatively minor points, and philosophical theories, and modes of defending the Calvinistic system of doctrines, there has always been, as you are aware, a diversity of opinion, with freedom of discussion, among the Calvinists in this country, especially in New England, but which[pg 145]has never impaired their fellowship or mutual confidence. To these topics of difference, greater or less importance has been attached by different individuals. In respect to some of these, (and, in respect to them, I suppose myself to agree with a large majority of our Calvinistic clergy,) I will now briefly but frankly state what I donot, and what I do, believe.
“I donotbelieve that the posterity of Adam are, in the proper sense of the language, guilty of his sin; or that the ill desert of that sin is truly theirs; or that they are punished for that sin. But I do believe that, by the wise and holy constitution of God, all mankind, in consequence of Adam's sin, become sinners by their own act.
“I donotbelieve that the nature of the human mind, which God creates, is itself sinful; or that God punishes men for the nature which he creates; or that sin pertains to any thing in the mind which precedes all conscious mental exercise or action, and which is neither a matter of consciousness nor of knowledge. But I do believe that sin, universally, is no other than selfishness, or apreferenceof one's self to all others,—of some inferior good to God; that this free, voluntary preference is a permanent principle of action in all the unconverted; and that this is sin, and all that in the Scriptures is meant by sin. I also believe that such is thenatureof the human mind, that it becomes the occasion of universal sin in men in all the appropriate circumstances of their existence, and that, therefore, they are truly and properly said to be sinnersby nature.
“I donotbelieve that sin can be proved to be the necessary means of the greatest good, and that, as such, God prefers it, on the whole, to holiness in its stead; or that a God of sincerity and truth punishes his creatures for doing that which he, on the whole, prefers they should do, and which, as the means of good, is the best thing they can do. But I do believe that holiness, as the means of good, may be better than sin; that it may be true that God, all things considered, prefers holiness to sin in all instances in which the latter takes place, and, therefore, sincerely desires that all men[pg 146]should come to repentance, though, for wise and good reasons, hepermits, or does not prevent, the existence of sin. I donotbelieve that it can be proved that an omnipotent God would beunableto secure more good by means of the perfect and universal obedience of his creatures, if they would render it, than by means of their sin. But I do believe that it may involve a dishonorable limitation of his power to suppose that he could not do it.3
“I donotbelieve that the grace of God can be truly said to beirresistible, in the primary, proper import of this term. But I do believe that, in all cases, itmay beresisted by man as a free moral agent, and that, when it becomes effectual to conversion, as it infallibly does in the case of all the elect, it isunresisted.
“I donotbelieve that the grace of God is necessary, as Arminians and some others maintain, to render man an accountable agent, and responsible for rejecting the offers of eternal life. But I do believe that man would be such an agent, and thus responsible, were no such grace afforded, and that otherwise‘grace would be no more grace.’
“I donotbelieve that it is necessary that the sinner, in using the means of regeneration, should commit sin in order to become holy. But I do believe that, as a moral agent, he is qualified so to use these means, i. e., the truth of God when present to his mind, as to become holy at once; that he is authorized to believe that, through the grace of the Holy Spirit, thismay bedone; and that, except in so doing, he cannot be truly and properly said tousethe means of regeneration.
“I donotbelieve that we are authorized to assure the sinner,[pg 147]as Arminians do, and some others also, that the Holy Spirit is always ready to convert him. But I do believe that we are authorized to assure any sinner that itmay be truethat the Holy Spirit is now ready to convert him;‘that Godperadventurewill now give him repentance;’and that thus, in view of the possible intervention of divine influence, we remove what would otherwise be a ground of fatal discouragement to the sinner, when we exhort him to immediate repentance.
“I have dwelt the more on some of these particulars, because much pains has been taken, by some individuals, to make the impression that I have departed from the true faith respecting the influences of the Holy Spirit, even denying his influences altogether. So far is this from the fact, that, as you well know, no one attaches higher importance to this doctrine than I do, preaches it more decisively, or appreciates more highly its practical relations and bearings. In my own view, the power of the gospel on the mind of the sinner very much consists in the two great facts of his complete moral agency as the basis of his obligation, of his guilt, and of his duty;—and of his dependence on the sovereign grace of God, resulting from his voluntary perverseness in sin. Without the latter, we could, in my opinion, neither show the Christian what thanks he owes his Deliverer from sin, nor awaken the sinner to flee from the wrath to come. This doctrine seems to be indispensable to destroy the presumptuous reliance of the sinner on future repentance, as it shows him how fearfully he provokes an offended God to withhold the grace on which all depends. At the same time, one thing is indubitably certain, viz., that God never revealed the doctrine of the sinner's dependence on his Spirit, to present the sinner from doing his duty at once. God does not call sinners to instant compliance with the terms of life, and then assure them that such compliance is utterly out of the question, and to be wholly despaired of. The opposite impression, however, is not uncommon; and it is an error not less fatal to immediate repentance, than the fond hope of[pg 148]repenting hereafter. Both are to be destroyed; and he who does not preach the gospel in that manner which tends to destroy both, preaches it but imperfectly.
“In the earlier revivals of this country, great prominence was given, in the preaching, to the doctrine of dependence, in the forms of regeneration, election, &c. This was what was to be expected from the Calvinistic preachers of the time, in view of the prevalence of Arminianism. In the more recent revivals, however, a similar prominence seems to be given to moral agency, in the forms of present obligation to duty, its present practicability, &c. The preaching, thus distinguished in its more prominent characteristics, has been undeniably owned and blessed by the Spirit of God, although we are very apt to believe that what is true of one kind of preaching at one time, must be true of it at another. Now, I believe that both the doctrines of dependence and moral accountability must beadmitted by the public mind, to secure upon that mind the full power of the gospel. I also believe that greater or lessprominenceshould be given to the one or the other of these doctrines, according to the prevailing state of public opinion. When, at the earlier periods alluded to, the doctrine of dependence was dwelt on chiefly, (I do not suppose exclusively,) the public mind believed enough—I might say too much—concerning the free moral agency of man, and had not so well learned as since to pervert the doctrine of dependence to justify the waiting attitude of a passive recipient. And, then, both doctrines told with power on the mind and the conscience, and, through God, were attended with great and happy results. But the prominence given to the doctrine of dependence, in preaching, was continued, until, if I mistake not, it so engrossed the public attention, and so obscured or weakened the doctrine of responsibility, that many fell into the opposite error of quietly waiting for God's interposition. Hence, when this prevailing error is again corrected by a more prominent exhibition of man's responsibility, in the form of immediate obligation, &c., the power of both doctrines is again combined on[pg 149]the public mind, and we see the same or even greater results in revivals of religion. Nor would it be strange if the latter kind of preaching should, in its turn, prevail so exclusively and so long, that the practical influence of the doctrine of dependence should be greatly impaired, to be followed with another dearth of revivals and a quiet reliance of sinful men on their own self-sufficiency. On this subject, I have often, in view of the tendency of the human mind to vacillate from one extreme to the other, expressed my apprehensions. In some of my brethren, whom I love and respect, I see what I esteem adisproportionedestimate of the importance of preaching dependence; in others, whom I equally respect, I see what I regard as adisproportionedestimate of the importance of preaching moral responsibility. In regard to myself, I can say that I have aimed, in this respect, rightly to divide the word of truth, and that those discourses in which I have best succeeded in bringing the two doctrines to bear, in their combined force, on the mind, have been more blessed to the awakening and conversion of sinners, than almost any others which I preach. When both doctrines are wisely and truly presented, the sinner has no resting-place. Ho cannot well avoid a sense of guilt while proposing to remain in his sins, for he sees that he is a free moral agent, under all the responsibilities of such an agent to immediate duty. He cannot well presume on his resolution of future repentance, for he sees that sovereign, injured grace may at once abandon him to hopeless sin. He is thus shut up to the faith,—to the immediate performance of his duty. In accordance with these views, I aim, in my instructions to those who are preparing for the ministry, to inculcate the importance of a consistent, well-proportioned exhibition of the two great doctrines of the sinner's dependence and responsibility, that, in this respect, they may hold the minds of their hearers under the full influence of that gospel which is the power of God to salvation.
“I have thus stated, more minutely, perhaps, than you anticipated, my views and opinions. I could wish that they might be satisfactory to all our Orthodox brethren. I have[pg 150]no doubt that they will be to very many, and to some who have been alarmed by groundless rumors concerning my unsoundness in the faith. With respect to what I have calledleading doctrines, I regard these as among the cardinal truths of the Christian system. They are truths to which I attach the highest importance, and in which my faith is more and more confirmed, the more I examine the word of God. Tosomeof those of which I have spoken ascomparatively minor points, I attach a high importance in their practical bearings and doctrinal connections. They are points, however, in regard to which there is more or less diversity of opinion among the Orthodox; and, as it is not my intention nor my practice to denounce others as heretics, merely because they differ from me in these matters, so I should be pleased with the reciprocation of the like catholicism on their part.”