Page images
PDF
EPUB

If a being be, like Adam, created pure and disposed to right, yet as an agent freely able to choose right or wrong, his holiness, as created and before his free act, is pure and excellent. Yet it is not meritorious. It can claim no moral approbation or moral reward. Its first meritorious and morally deserving holiness is derived from action. And that action must be volition put forth with full and adequate power of contrary action instead.

Again, if God should create or allow to be born a being of mixed character, (suppose it to be man,) the automatic spring of whose volitions, under the touch of automatic motive forces, should be necessitatively sometimes in an injurious direction, and sometimes in a beneficial direction, such a being might be automatically excellent and perfect, but he would be below the conditions of probationary existence. His good or bad volitions being automatic, would be equally irresponsible and unmeriting of reward or penalty. Any ideas or notions implanted in his own nature of moral approval or condemnation would be arbitrary and false. He is incapable, in a responsible sense, of moral action, moral character, moral probation, judgment, or retribution.

Let us now suppose a being, such as man truly is, of a mixed character in another respect. Suppose him automatic in his perceptions, emotions, and desires, yet free and alternative in his volitions; capable of choosing either of diverse ways in a right direction or in a wrong instead. He is now no longer in a pure automatic nature. He has mounted into the grade of a morally responsible being. He is henceforth capable of probation, responsibility, judgment, and retribution.

Again, let us suppose that this last being is able, by his free volitions, to modify his automatic propensions; namely, his intellections, emotions, and desires, so as to make them better or worse than they naturally were. Either he neglects to restrain them from excess or wrong direction; or he directs, impels, develops, trains, and enlarges them for wrong; or he restrains and confines them to their proper degree and to a right direction. Even his automatic faculties would thence derive a sort of secondary responsible character; at least for much, if not for all their so formed character, he would be volitionally and morally responsible. It is thus that a man's sensibilities, intellections,

emotions, and beliefs become responsible. Again, a man may so train up into magnitude and force of will his automatic faculties, as to render suppressed his freedom of volition for any good; and thus he is automatically evil. Such volitional automatism for evil being self-superinduced, is responsible; since where a man has freely annihilated his own power for good, he is responsible for the evil. Self-produced necessity is a responsible necessity. And from this view we can clearly understand how the sinner who is given up of God, and who sins and only sins, and that by a perpetual necessity, is responsible for his sins none the less. The necessity is superinduced, and therefore only aggravates the guilt of every sin. So all the sins of the finally damned, however necessitated, are none the less responsible, that necessity being self-superinduced. The holiness of the saints in heaven is none the less rewardable because it has become necessary; since, though they rest from their labors, their works do follow them. They are rewardable, not only for their works during probation, but for their works of holiness, obedience, love, and praise before God in heaven.

ART. IX.-FOREIGN RELIGIOUS INTELLIGENCE.

GREAT BRITAIN.

THE PROTESTANT CHURCHES.-A new era seems to have begun in the Church of England. The Convocations of Canterbury and York, which for about one hundred and fifty years had virtually lost their legislative powers, have been this year, for the first time, restored to the fullness of their former jurisdiction, That of Canterbury had, for seven or eight years, gradually prepared for this important change, while that of York met this year for the first time, and found itself at once in full possession of those rights which the Convocation of Canterhury had been gradually recovering. Henceforth the annual meetings of both are to be as regular in their recurrence as those of Parliament. Both conventions had a very interesting debate on the Oxford "Essays and Reviews." Already, before the meeting of the convocations, a letter of the Arch

bishop of Canterbury declared, with the consent of all the bishops, the holding of such views as are expressed by the Essays and Reviews inconsistent with an honest subscription to the formularies of the Church, though believing it doubtful whether the bishops would feel at liberty to take any decisive measures against the authors. The lower house of the Convocation of Canterbury, by an overwhelming majority, expressed their concurrence with the joint letter of the bishops, and pledged their influence to protect the Church from the "pernicious doctrines and heretical tendencies" of the book. Later the same house appointed a committee, with Archdeacon Denison as chairman, to extract from the volume the most obnoxious passages, and to submit them to the bishops for further legislation. From the discussion in the upper house it appeared that the bishops were divided as to the best

course to pursue with regard to the authors of the book. The Bishop of London, who said he was a personal friend of two of the authors, hoped that they would issue a declaration satisfactory to the Church, and dissuaded the bishops from hasty action. The Bishop of Oxford, on the other hand, insisted on a formal retraction, and a majority of the bishops were with him of opinion that a nere declaration, as proposed by the Blshop of London, would not be sufficient.

The discussion on this important subject in the convocation was but a faint reflex of the immense agitation which has been created by the controversy in the entire State Church, and which has already made it one of the most memorable theological controversies England has ever seen. In March a deputation of the English clergy waited on the Archbishop of Canterbury to present an address, signed by nine thousand ministers, which expresses the hope that the Church would interfere by way of discipline. The High and Low Church parties are unanimous in their condemnation of the book; and also a number of leading men among the Broad Churchmen, such as the Archbishop of Dublin, and the Bishops of Hereford and St. Davids, have raised their voices against it. Others of this school, as the Bishop of London, in his recently published work, "Dangers and Safeguards of Modern Theology," endeavor to hold a mediating position. The number of books and pamphlets published against the Essays is innumerable, while but few have come out in its favor. Also all the great literary organs of England have taken part in the controversy. An article in the Quarterly Review, which was first ascribed to Bishop Wilberforce of Oxford and afterward to Mr. Mansell, attracted so great attention, that the number containing it passed rapidly through five editions. Rev. Dr. Buchanan, of Edinburgh, has replied to the seven Essays in detail, in a series of seven letters in the Morning Post, which have since been issued in separate book form. In the North British Review the subject has been discussed with great fullness by Mr. Isaac Taylor, who charges the essayists with borrowing from Germany in a frivolous, vainglorious spirit, without giving due weight to the difficulties of the subject, and the refutations already given. An able ar

ticle, very largely in sympathy with the essayists, has appeared in the Edinburgh Review, from the pen of Dr. Stanley, Professor of Ecclesiastical History at Oxford, and biographer of Dr. Arnold.

The great English anniversaries were this year of more than usual interest. So largely has the interest of the English Churches in the objects of the religious associations increased, that nearly all the chief societies could report an income exceeding that of any previous year. Thus it was the case with the Wesleyan Missionary Society, Bap tist Missionary Society, British and Foreign Bible Society, and others. And yet the number of congregations which contribute nothing for the religious societies, seems to be larger than might be inferred from the great amount of the receipts; for it was stated, for instance, at the Baptist Missionary Society, that there were still about one thousand congregations which were not at all represented in the list of contributors. The annual reports indicated that the manifold and extensive agencies of the British Christians for promoting the progress of religion at home and abroad have been again greatly blessed, and at the Wesleyan Missionary meeting, in particular, a letter just received from China contained surprising recent intelligence concerning the bright prospects of Christianity among the Chinese insurgents. At the annual meeting of the Malta Protestant College Society, for the free education of natives in the Turkish empire, and other countries contiguous to the Mediterranean, it was stated that a special sum of £10,000 is now being raised for the liquidation of a heavy debt on the institution, and to provide, by the enlargement of the buildings, for the free admission of an increased number of Oriental missionary students, and secure their maintenance for a few years.

THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH.The bishops of Ireland have held another National Synod at Dublin, and issued another manifesto to "the Catholic clergy and laity of Ireland." It is sigued by all the prelates (27) except Archbishop M'Hale, who did not attend the meeting. Dr. Cullen signs it before "the primate of all Ireland," as "the delegate of the apostolic see." The whole of the document has been read from every altar and pulpit of Ireland,

on one or two Sundays. The bishops exhort the faithful "to walk in the footsteps of the Queen of Heaven." They quote the report of the Commission on Education in England in favor of the denominational system, which alone will satisfy them. But they pronounce no formal condemnation of the national system, and issue no prohibition for the withdrawal of the Roman Catholic children from the schools.

GERMANY.

THE PROTESTANT CHURCHES.-The influence of Rationalism in some of the German State Churches, of which we gave a full account in the April number of the Methodist Quarterly Review, seems still to be on the increase. In the Palatinate, the western part of Bavaria, the General Synod of the United Evangelical Church, which met from February 22 to March 10, has been prevailed upon, by the influence of the government and other outside pressure, to make to the Rationalistic party very important concessions. The great majority of the synod (thirty-six to eleven) was still of opinion that the official Rationalistic church-books, (hymn book and catechism,) which were formerly in use, and whose expulsion from the Churches was decreed by former General Synods, are "unequivocally opposed to the faith and confession of the Church;" but in view of the violent agitation of the Rationalistic party, it did not dare to provide for any effectual measures for the final suppression of the old books, but left the final decision to the option of the several congregations. Since then the opposition to the introduction of the orthodox books has become much stronger; an association for this purpose numbers more than ten thousand active members; in Neustadt, one of the largest congregations of the province, the presbytery have decreed, by seven votes against three, to remove the orthodox books which had already been in use for some time, and to reintroduce the old ones, and it is feared that many other congregations will follow this example. The Church stands evidently on the eve of a very violent internal struggle. In the Grand Duchy of Baden the Rationalistic party has not gained so complete a victory as was at first anticipated. The new members of the Supreme Ecclesiastical Board belong

partly to a so-called "mediating" party. One of the newly appointed councillors is Dr. Rothe, the author of the most celebrated German work on Christian ethics. At all events, the position of the Rationalists has become a much more favorable one. They have at least one decided representative in the government of the Church, they are sure of the support of the majority of the legislature, they expect greater concessions from the government, and they hope that they can turn the growing dissatisfaction of the people with the interference of state governments in Church matters to their advantage.

A revival of religion, like those experienced by so many of the English and American Churches, is a phenomenon so unknown in Germany, that the first appearance of it could not fail to produce a profound commotion. Even most of the evangelical pastors and Churches have been accustomed to look upon it with distrust and suspicion. At length the time of trial has come, the first recent movement of the kind on German soil having taken place in an institution for poor children at Elberfeld. Physical phenomena have attended the revival, very similar to those in Ireland and Jamaica, and have startled out of their propriety the political press, who have raised a furious outcry against it, and the civil authorities, who have thought it necessary to interfere. All the officers of the institution have been compelled to leave; and attempts have been made to put down the work by force, or to terrify the children, by tedious examinations, into the belief that they were merely under a delusion! On the other hand, however, seven of the evangelical pastors of Elberfeld, who have been constantly visiting the institution, and who are most intimately acquainted with the whole case, have come out in defense of the revival. They testify that the most marked features observable among the children have been sorrow for sin, and crying to God for mercy. They throw the responsibility of having marred this great and good work on the magistracy. The district synod, which met at Elberfeld in the beginning of May, has issued a strong protest against the dismission of the officers of the poor-house; on the other hand, however, the town council of Elberfeld has, with all votes against four, remonstrated against this "interference

of the synod in matters of city government."

The political agitation in Austria has at length compelled the government to make to the Protestants of the German and Sclavonian provinces some of those concessions for which they have petitioned for so many years. The imperial patent of April 8 declared that henceforth the Protestants shall have equal rights with the Roman Catholics. They shall have, therefore, also the right to settle in any place they choose, a provision which has given some offense among the fanatical people of Tyrol, from which province the Protestants have been hitherto excluded. All the former restrictions with regard to the establishment of churches with spires and bells, the public celebration of religious solemnities, and the free purchase of books and periodicals, are abolished. Henceforth the Protestants will be exempted from paying, as heretofore they had to do, fees to the Roman Catholic priests. The patent gives to the Church also a provisional Church constitution, on a thoroughly presbyterian basis; and the first General Synod has the right either to ratify this provisional constitution or to propose changes. For the ecclesiastical and educational wants of the Protestant Churches a proportional contribution from the state treasury is promised. So far the contents of the patent seem to have been received in Austria with general satisfaction. The only points to which objections have been made are those which reserve for the emperor the right of appointing all the councillors and the president of the Supreme Ecclesiastical Council, and of confirming the superintendents. It is true that the same right is possessed by all the other princes of Germany, Protestant and Roman Catholic; but, in accordance with the general demand of ecclesiastical independence, which is growing throughout Germany, the Austrian Protestants, once in possession of representative assemblies, will soon demand that the self-government of the Church be carried through in all its details.

THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH.The influence which Rome had gradually gained in several German States by means of favorable concordats, has experienced another and emphatic reverse. The concordat which the Pope had concluded with the King of Wurtemberg

[ocr errors]

has been rejected by the Chamber of Representatives by a decided majority. The representatives of the people had never given their consent to this compact. In 1857 it was agreed to by the cabinet without consulting the chambers, and the government commenced to carry its provisions through, independently of the legislature. The voice of the entire Protestant population declared itself loudly in favor of rejection, and more than six hundred petitions, all numerously signed, were addressed, to this end, to the government and the legisla ture. When the Chambers were convened on February 28 the discussion of the concordat question was immediately urged, and, on the vote being taken, sixty-seven members voted for the rejection, and only twenty-seven against it. The majority comprises all the Protestant deputies, save four, while the Roman Catholic members, except two, form the minority. The time of concordats may now be regarded as past. The legislatures of some of the smaller states which have a numerous Roman Catholic population, have voted addresses to their princes, petitioning them not to enter into any concordat with the Pope, but to regulate the affairs of the Roman Catholic citizens in the way of ordinary legislation.

FRANCE.

THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH.Among the innumerable pamphlets to which the situation of Rome has given rise, none seems to have made a deeper sensation than the one entitled France, Rome, and Italy. Signed by M. de la Guerronnière, director of printing and publication at the Ministry of the Interior, and approved by M. de Persigny, it was considered throughout France, and by all parties, to be the view the emperor wishes the world to take of his policy with regard to the temporal power of the popes. The bishops of France are almost unanimously so fanatical and blind supporters of the secular sovereignty of the Bishop of Rome, that they have been induced, by the great success of the above pamphlet, to make the most violent attacks on the emperor. The palm of boldness in these attacks is due to the Bishop of Poitiers, who in a pastor. al letter, which had to be read from every pulpit of the diocese, did not hesitate to represent the emperor as Pontius

« PreviousContinue »