Page images
PDF
EPUB

of their ministers a subscription to the Westminster Confession, "as containing that system of doctrine taught in the Scriptures." It is not implied (as Dr. Hodge has lately shown) that every proposition in the creed is believed; but it is implied that the system in general-the faith of the Reformed churches-is accepted. There is more liberty, at the same time that there is more safety, for sound doctrine, under such an arrangement, than under any other.

The second objection to a qualified subscription to the symbols above mentioned, is founded on the character of their language. Dr. Sturtevant (with whom Dr. Dutton and some others agree) wants a creed in original, "living language," and not in the old language of the Westminster, Savoy, and Anglican formularies. With all respect for these gentlemen, we cannot but think that the language of these Documents is in the main excellent, and not capable of being much improved by the living Doctors who were conspicuous in the Boston Council. It is good English-clear, precise, and none the worse for being tinged with the hue of age. Old words, like old wine, are sometimes better than new. We cannot but think that the time which many spend in complaining of the style of these venerable symbols, the product of so much thought, might be more profitably spent in studying them. There is an American zeal for newness, that is not always according to knowledge.

The Preliminary Committee were, moreover, of opinion that the Congregational denomination could not afford to throw away its history by ignoring the doctrinal symbols which have been acknowledged among us for near two centuries-as far as any symbols have had general recognition. As there were no good reasons to the contrary, and many good reasons in favor of this course, they were gratified with having the opportunity of thus connecting the present generation with the generations that have gone before us. Moreover, it is still very doubtful whether a Declaration which contained no reference to the symbols and no sort of acknowledgment of them could have carried even a majority vote in the Council.

And what value would a mere majority vote on such a question possess?

While we set forth our denominational platform of doctrine, and array ourselves with the other Reformed churches of Great Britain and the Continent, as well as of our own country, the Preliminary Committee also thought it desirable to single out the cardinal verities of the Gospel,-with reference to two ends,—first, as a platform of fellowship with other bodies of Christians, and, secondly, as a protest against present, threatening errors. They accordingly prepared an additional Statement to which a pious Episcopalian, or even a pious Quaker could assent, and which presented, also, a sharp and explicit, and, in our judgment, a timely and proper, condemnation of the current heresies of Naturalism.

Now the larger committee appointed by the Council adopted the first and most important part of the document submitted by the Preliminary Committee, making, however, two amend ments which we cannot but think unfortunate. First, they introduced the word Calvinism, which is unnecessary, offen. sive to some, and hardly comports with the dignity of such a Paper. The Preliminary Committee had used the term "Calvinistic" in their explanatory report, as a term in more general use in certain quarters than the word "Reformed," but had deliberately excluded the former term from their creed. The Reformed church is, indeed, frequently styled Calvinistic, but many prefer to array themselves under no human master, even though he were so able and prominent a theologian as John Calvin. Secondly, the larger committee left out the Doctrinal Articles of the Church of England from the formula expressing adherence to the previously recognized symbols. This omission was undesirable. The Church of England was once in cordial fellowship with the other branches of the Reformed church. The framers of the Articles sympathized cordially with the Helvetic reformers. It is important to keep up the recollection of this fact, and still more important to retain in respect this moderate and excellent formulary which the Saybrook Synod placed in our hands. The amendments which Dr. Leavitt offered would have re

stored the first part of the Declaration substantially to its original shape.

In place of the second part of the document offered by the Preliminary Committee, the larger committee presented a statement of a different character. Without good reason, they abridged the recital of obnoxious errors, so as to deprive it of all value, because robbed of its definiteness. Nobody denies "the fact of sin," but many do attach a false definition to sin, which is equally mischievous; and it was this false definition. which the Preliminary Committee pointed out and condemned. The Statement offered by the larger committee contained no Articles of Faith which are not included in the earlier draft, except the Church and Sacraments (which, considering the particular end for which this brief creed was framed, it had not been thought necessary to introduce), the Resurrection of the body, and Inspiration in the form of a quotation of a scriptural passage, which, as no interpretation is affixed to it, is manifestly inapposite and without force as a creed-statement But the large committee, strangely enough, after a somewhat rambling and wordy paraphrase put in the room of the neat and precise phraseology of Dr. Thompson, proceed to dilate on the advantages of Congregationalism, the purifying influence of the Gospel, &c., &c., intermingling allusions to our “late struggle," and introducing two prayers. And all this in a creed! They took the Preliminary Committee's report and—to borrow the politicians' phrase-put a speech in its belly. Considering that the larger committee, also, were aiming to express "the earnestness of our sympathy with all those Christian Churches which are agreed with us in the essential truths of the Gospel," a laudation of our own denominational peculiarities, however it might be deserved, was scarcely in place. The original Paper was hardly made better by the addition of these "glittering generalities."

It is obvious that a portion of the Council were feeling after something of a different nature from the quiet and carefullyworded creed submitted by Dr. Thompson. They were feeling after a more oratorical, and if our readers tional utterance—after a Confession of Faith stamped with this

[blocks in formation]

please, more devo

[ocr errors]

peculiar character. And such a confession the Council finally reached at Plymouth, "standing in the burial-place" of the Pilgrims. It has the decided advantage over the second Paper, that, unlike the last, it does not seek to blend two incongruous things, an exact symbol or standard of doctrine, and a more fervid and less accurate confession. It is sufficiently homogeneous in style. And it contains a declaration of assent, for substance of doctrine, to the creeds adopted by the previous Massachusetts Synods. This was the most essential feature of the Preliminary Committee's Report, and we are glad that it was finally, in some form, retained. The Confession adopted at Plymouth is of no value as a symbol in the usual acceptation-as a condensed, yet complete, a calm and exact definition of the principles of the Congregational faith. Yet it has a high value of its own, it derives increased interest from the circumstances under which it was adopted, and is a gratifying proof that in the essentials of faith the Council was at one. We might have preferred that a platform of doctrine less rhetorical should have been adopted; but, perhaps, the action of the Council, considering the complexion of that body and all the circumstances, was the best that could be hoped for. Gregory Nazianzen said that he never knew of a Council that did not do more harm than good, or that came to a good end. We are persuaded that our Council has done much more good than harm, and, therefore, according to this most orthodox authority, stands higher than any of those ancient, turbulent assemblies which, when they are looked at from a distance and not attentively scanned, attract so much of ignorant reverence.

ARTICLE

XII.-NOTICES OF NEW BOOKS.

THEOLOGICAL, RELIGIOUS, AND PHILOSOPHICAL.

REASON IN RELIGION.*-It is difficult to describe and still more difficult to criticise this very interesting and well-written volume. The author is an accomplished scholar, a very able writer, with an extensive knowledge of the history of theological opinions and an honest disposition to acknowledge whatever he finds of good in every manifestation of religious opinion. He is a pronounced Theist against the Pantheistic tendencies so current among the litterateurs and scientists of this generation. He is a defender of faith and its rights against the cool and analytic rationalism of the times. He finds much to admire in the great and powerful ecclesiastical organizations of the past, for their efficiency in sustaining the faith and inspiring the forces of Christendom. He has even not a few good words for the orthodoxy of Calvin, against which the previous generation of his co-religionists could find no language of condemnation and abhorrence too severe.

Though Unitarian or Liberal in his own ecclesiastical relations, he finds much to criticise in most of the current forms of Unitarian theology. He contends very stoutly against every type of the Arian hypothesis, and would reject with the extremest dissatisfaction the humanitariasm of Priestley and Belsham. He acknowledges the power and pathos, the necessity and the charm, which have endeared to the Christian church the doctrine of the incarnation.

And yet his own theory of the person of Christ makes him to be a man in whom the fullness of the Godhead dwelt, only as the possibly divine in man was developed and manifested in him to the utmost possible completeness and perfection. He owns that it was absolutely certain, nay it was inevitably necessary that this divine man should in all the first centuries be worshiped as God. Otherwise the idolatries and polytheisms of the world could never have been displaced and overthrown; otherwise the heart of man

* Reason in Religion. By FREDERIC HENRY HEDGE. Boston: Walker, Fuller & Co. Boston, 1865. pp. 458.

« PreviousContinue »