Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB

How preposterous, then, was the "dispute" (which Hutchinson says this paper had occasioned a hundred years ago) "whether the first settlers of the Massachusetts were of the Church of England or not." Beyond all reasonable doubt, "the principals and body" of that Company were, earnestly, "of the Church of England," in their own meaning of that phrase. They were strenuous upholders of a national ecclesiasticism in opposition to the theory of separation. As Englishmen in England, their position was within the national churchestablishment to reform it, and not outside of it to denounce and destroy it. It was thus that they carried with them to the colony they were founding, so much of the spirit and habit of political interference with church affairs. Their greatest errors in the management of their enterprise arose from the fact, that till they had sailed out of Yarmouth harbor, they were, conscientiously and truly, "of the Church of England."

At the same time they held-and why should they not?that the distinctive regulations and discipline of the Church of England were of no force beyond the boundaries of the realm of England. It had long been a familiar fact to them, that their fellow subjects north of the Tweed, owning allegiance to the same king, were not of the Church of England, but of another, with discipline and regulations of its own. If the narrow Tweed could make so great a difference between subjects of the same king dwelling on either bank, why should not the broad ocean make as great a difference between them and their fellow subjects in the mother country? Therefore they had no doubt that by migrating to another land and founding there another realm, they would put themselves beyond the reach of Anglican uniformity, and would attain, under their charter of self-government, sufficient power to "practice the positive part of church-reformation." It was in this way that the Puritans of Massachusetts, taking the New Testament as the sole authority, found themselves standing, ere they were aware, side by side, and hand in hand, with the Pilgrims of Plymouth.

ARTICLE X.-NOTICES OF BOOKS.

THEOLOGY.

YOUNG'S "PROVINCE OF REASON."*-The name of the author of this book is a guarantee for its value, even though it were not a professed reply to Mansel. In JOHN YOUNG the author of "The Limits of Religious Thought" has found a competent critic and an antagonist worthy of his steel. The work is divided into six sections. The first of these is Introductory, in which are discussed Rationalism in general, and the German Philosophical Rationalism in particular; the effort being to show that the cry of Rationalism may be ignorantly and foolishly urged, and that what is and what is not objectionable in the reality ought to be intelligently discriminated. The second section treats of Applications of Logic, in which Mansel's exposition of the senses of "The Infinite," and "The Absolute," are criticised-his loose conceptions and his headlong inferences are skillfully exposed, and the entire treatment of the matters which are vital to his whole theory is shown to be superficial and inconsistent. Section third, concerning the Philosophy of the Unconditioned, expounds the difference between Mansel and Hamilton, showing that the one wrote in the interest of theology and the other in that of philosophy, and that the real intent of each is opposite to that of the other. After discussing the Scottish and Oxonian theories, he gives his own. Section fourth, concerning Written Revelations, discusses, first, the necessary conditions of Revelation, contending that these are certain and trustworthy knowledge of God and his will; second, the Evidences of Revelation, showing that for the majority of mankind these must necessarily be internal, and that to establish these last the comparison must be made between what man may know of God and the book which claims to have been given by God; thirdly, Revelation and God, showing that if God cannot in the nature of things be revealed, then there can be no Revelation. Section fifth, concerning Morality and Moral

The Province of Reason. A criticism of the Bampton Lecture on "The Limits of Religious Thought." By JOHN YOUNG, LL, D., Edinburgh, Author of "The Christ of History," &c. New York: Robert Carter & Brothers. 1860. 16mo. pp. 305.

[blocks in formation]

Sense, treats somewhat as they deserve, the very objectionable views on these subjects propounded by Mansel, though with scarcely the discrimination and force which we had expected, the author's own philosophy not being sufficiently mature and correct to enable him to vindicate the truth at all points with entire success. We find in this section, however, many just observations and forcible arguments. Our author exposes, though not with half the severity which they richly merit, the dangerous doctrines of Mansel in respect to our capacity to judge of moral excellence or the opposite, without the light of Revelation. The last section, concerning Reason and Faith, vindicates Reason and shows that there is no conflict between it and Faith. The author seeks to develop the relations of the two, not to our satisfaction altogether, we confess. He fails to emphasize the moral element in Faith, which is its distinguishing feature as well as its legitimate criterion. Still he contends manfully and rightly for the claims and authority of Reason, and shows that to exalt Faith at the expense of Reason is to destroy both Faith and Reason. The book is most timely, not merely in its relation to Mansel's plausible theories, but because it is adapted to check a tendency to inexact conceptions on such subjects, which are fustered by other theologians besides those of the school of Mansel.

HODGE'S OUTLINES OF THEOLOGY.-This work exhibits a system of theology, in the form of questions and answers, and covers all the topics usually embraced in treatises upon natural and revealed religion. The style is concise and perspicuous. The matter is derived from the lectures of Professor Hodge, of Princeton, with occasional citations from his reviews and essays. It may thus he regarded as an authentic and authorized description of the Princeton theology, and as such will be sought for by theological students, and ministers. It is no more than justice to say that under various heads we find valuable arguments and definitions, couched always in clear and manly English. The reputation of Dr. Hodge for theological ability and learning will not be lessened by this publication. At the same time, we must add that on controverted themes, as original sin, and the nature of the atonement, we are furnished with most unsatisfactory answers to the objections which have been again and again brought against the

* Outlines of Theology. By the Rev. A. ALEXANDER HODGE, Pastor of the Presbyterian Church, Fredericksburg, Va. New York: Robert Carter & Brothers. 1860.

Princeton theories, and with which the author, by the very fact of considering them, shows himself to be acquainted. Why attempt a rational defense of propositions which can never be vindicated on grounds of reason? Why not rest them solely on the Church authority, or on the interpretations of Scripture which are alleged in their behalf! We are tired of such flimsy reasoning as we find on page 256, et seq., and in the chapter on the Satisfaction of Christ and the Extent of Redemption. If the advocates of the Princeton views have nothing more thorough and pertinent to say in response to their opponents than the threadbare phrases which they must feel do not meet the case, they had much better abstain from controversy.

LOVE AND PENALTY.*-This timely volume consists of nine lectures, which were delivered on Sabbath evenings, and are published at the request of a large number of gentlemen who heard them. They are an eloquent and able vindication of the theme which is described in the title. There is no subject on which there is more vacillation and skepticism than this-none on which much of modern popular literature is more thoroughly unsound. As a consequence, the entire system of the gospel is feebly received by multitudes who, in some sense, believe it. The motives which enforce to Christian gratitude and obedience are robbed of much of their appropriate power-while appeals from the pulpit to the unbelieving are impotent to alarm and to win.

Dr. Thompson was wise in selecting his theme, and he has treated it with abundant and varied power. His argument is clear, his illustrations are felicitous, his appeals are earnest, and his spirit is eminently conciliatory and Christian. We hope to give a full analysis and review of the volume in our next number. All that we can do at present is confidently to recommend it to our readers as a work which deserves their attention, and which ought to receive a wide circulation.

METCALF'S NATURE AND FOUNDATION OF MORAL OBLIGATION.t-We

* Love and Penalty; or, Eternal Punishment consistent with the Fatherhood of God. By JOSEPH P. THOMPSON, D. D., Pastor of the Broadway Tabernacle Church. New York: Sheldon & Co. 1860. 18mo. pp. 358.

An Inquiry into the Nature, Foundation, and Extent of Moral Obligation, involving the nature of duty, of holiness and of sin. Being an introduction to the study of moral science in all its branches, including the Legal, Theological, and Governmental. By DAVID METCALF. Boston: Crosby, Nichols, Lee & Co. 1860. pp. 499.

announced this volume in our last number, and are now happy to see it before us. It is a volume unique in its method, but interesting in its argument, and, in the main, so far as we have examined, correct in its positions and conclusions. The subject of which it treats has been often and earnestly canvassed by theological and ethical philosophers. The author defends what he calls the doctrine of Benevolent Utility, the doctrine of Cumberland, the Edwardses, and Dwight; of Aristotle, Leibnitz, and Malebranche. He does this with a thoroughness of analysis, a subtlety of discrimination, and an unflinching and untiring pertinacity of argumentation, which are worthy of the highest praise. The circumstances under which his taste for speculative studies was developed, and the perseverance with which he has prosecuted them, would entitle his work to a respectful consideration, if its intrinsic claims to attention were not of the highest order. It is a book such as

sixty years ago would have been the theme of conversation in all the parishes of New England. The younger Edwards would have scrutinized every line. Hopkins, and Smalley, and Emmons, would each have perused it with eager interest. Scores of essays would have been written upon it for as many ministers' meetings.

The theme is just as interesting now as it ever was, and its applications are, if possible, more varied and more pressing to theology, to social science, and to common life. We advise our readers to buy this book, for though it seems, at the first view, to be a simple catechism, its questionings will awaken thought, and its answers remove difficulties that have disturbed many minds.

From the Preface we quote a single paragraph :

"The names by which doctrines are called often raise a prejudice against them, and in various ways cause them to be misunderstood, and for these reasons they become obnoxious to the popular mind. It is desirable, therefore, that the name of a doctrine should designate its true character, so as fairly to distinguish it from all other doctrines.

"That which we regard as the true doctrine on the nature of virtue may with propriety be designated the doctrine of benevolent utility, or benevolent rectitude, or universal benevolence. By these terms the true doctrine is purposely distinguished, 1. From the theory that mere undesigned utility is virtue: 2. From all the theories that involve selfishness as an element of virtue; 3. From all the forms of utilitarianism which discard impartial, universal, and disinterested benevolence; 4. From all the theories which deny that benevolence includes rectitude and all that is holiness; 5. From all the theories which deny that utility is an element in the foundation of obligation; 6. From all those which maintain that holiness is an end, but not a means;-that it is an ultimate end, in and of itself, having no end ulterior to itself; 7. And from the notion that the idea of virtue or right is a simple idea."

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »