Page images
PDF
EPUB

and the reviewer is one among others. Yet while put on so delicate a question, I would fain look around me to discern in what company I have placed myself by this mode of reasoning; and inquire, who there are, among contemporaries or predecessors, to give it the weight of their authority. I have reasoned from the constitution of the creature to the design of the Creator: from the fact that we are so constituted by the Creator as to be incapable of emotions of remorse, or a feeling of ill desert for any thing beside our own voluntary acts, that his moral government over us is founded upon such a principle. Am I alone in this reasoning? Among recent authors I find the acute reasoner, Dr. Brown, late Professor of Moral Philosophy in the University of Edinburgh, my firm associate. He has certainly analyzed our moral emotions into susceptibilities with which we have been endowed by the Creator, and placed the very basis of the moral government of God on this part of our constitution, that is, our perceptions of obligation in regard to an agent acting. Even in the somewhat varying systems of Paley, Clarke, and Wollaston, who ground moral distinctions severally on utility, on fitness, and on truth, the fundamental position respects conduct, and the acquiescence of the human mind in some ultimate obligation. The most enlightened of heathen moralists, Cicero, asserts of the law of nature, "It requires no commentator to render it distinctly intelligible, nor is it different at Rome, at Athens, now, and in the ages before and after, but in all ages and in all nations, it is, and has been, and will be, one and everlasting-one as that God its great author and promulgator, who is the common sovereign of mankind, is one." The enlightened, and devout Doddrige, refers specifically to the operations of conscience and the execution of laws among men, as evincing that natural liberty, or

the power of choosing, is the foundation of divine government. That distinguished prelate and profound reasoner, Bishop Butler, in his Analogy and other works, has, most distinctly, reasoned in the manner I have done; and some of his remarks are so strikingly pertinent, that I cannot forbear quoting them to your readers. In his dissertation on the nature of virtue, after alleging many considerations which prove that we have a "moral approving and disapproving faculty," he goes on to observe that "the object of this faculty is actions," premising that will and design constitute the nature of actions as dis

tinguished from events. "Acting, conduct, behaviour, abstracted from all regard to what is, in fact and event, the consequence of it is itself the natural object of the moral discernment as speculative truth and falsehood is of speculative reason." "We never in the moral way applaud or blame either ourselves or others for what we enjoy or what we suffer, or for having impressions made upon us which we consider as altogether out of our power; but only for what we do, or would have done had it been in our power, or for what we leave undone which we might have done." The conclusion to which he comes respecting the moral government of God is this: "now if human creatures are endued with such a moral nature as we have been explaining, or with a moral faculty, the natural object of which is actions, moral government must consist in rewarding and punishing them for so doing"that is, following or neglecting the rule of action suggested by this moral faculty. In his Analogy likewise, he reasons in the same man

[blocks in formation]

ment and sense of things, as a presentiment of what is to be hereafter; that is, by way of information beforehand what we are finally to expect in his world." But I find one of greater authority than all philosophers, moralists, theologians, and prelates, ancient or modern, who is associated with me in this reasoning-the apostle Paul. In his epistle to the Romans, ii. 15, he appeals to this very manifestation of the sentiments of men in their accusing and excusing, as showing the work of the law written in their hearts evincing a sentiment of nature within them-a feeling implanted within their breasts by their Creator, which of itself indicates the nature of his moral government. Am I then alone as a reasoner? or have I placed myself in creditable society?

:

Were it courteous now to retort, might I not call upon the reviewer to inform me whether it be creditable in him to state in his first paragraph that the proposition which is asserted in the Discourses is one which "the common sense of mankind will uphold and the whole spirit of the gospel will defend?" What has common sense to do with proving its truth, unless he resolves common sense into those plain and uneradicable dictates of conscience of which the discourses speak? And how, after taking such a position, will he defend such a bald assertion, as he makes in the direct face of it, on the following leaf: "there may be a thousand reasons, for any thing we can know, why God should reckon as sinful in any being, many other things, than his own personal violations of law?" Is not this to declare with one breath that common sense and the spirit of the gospel will uphold a truth, and yet there may be a thousand reasons for aught we know that it should not be true? But I forbear: it is not my object to have recourse to uncourteous retorts; but barely

to set my meaning clearly before your readers.

The reviewer next rejoices to see me coming forth to the light of "a purer theology" "than that which has long prevailed among Congregationalists, and still continues, not only in that order of Christians, but also among our own divines." The reviewer pours forth this joy over my denial of the literal imputation of the sin of Adam. How far that tenet is held among Episcopal divines at this day, I pretend not to know; but that it is not held to any extent by the Congregationalists of this State, and that my public denial of that tenet is not emerging forth to any clearer light than that which has blessed my brethren, I do know.

There is but one subject more touched upon by the reviewer, of which I wish to say any thing. I allude to that which he calls " strange language for an intelligent divine, the pastor of an intelligent flock like that at Yale College ;" and which he characterizes as conveying the doctrine of fatalism, viz.: the certainty of which I speak, that the descendants of Adam will be sinners. If he call this language strange with reference to Yale College, as being unprecedented there, he may take from his shelf the volumes of Dr. Dwight, and read his discourses on the decrees of God, and on the depravity of men, and gain a better information. If he call it strange for any man of intelligence to assert, then may he call those who framed the articles of his own church and all who have maintained those articles, destitute of intelligence. If he think it conveys a dangerous fatalism, which is destructive of free and responsible agency, his opinion is unwarranted by the language. His,' own language irresistibly propels" "irresistible influence,' "without the possibility of resistance," refers to a cause of sin which is irresistible in its nature, a cause

66

which with physical necessity produces its results. I have asserted no such thing. I maintain no such thing. I selected my language with the very intention of distinguishing moral causes from physical, and the certainty of free actions from a blind necessity. For, who that holds that moral agents are themselves the immediate authors, the immediate antecedents of their own actions, can allow other things to hold any other relevance to their actions as causes, than as grounds of certainty, or influential causes,-I mean other things within the range and system of created things?

In regard to the certainty of human conduct itself, have I asserted any thing more than even the reviewer himself will acknowledge to be true? He allows, I presume, that God at least foresees how men will conduct themselves and the foreknowledge of their conduct involves its certainty. Or is the certainty of sinning which I have attributed to men, a certainty which he will not acknowledge to exist? But I have applied the certainty no further than I apprehend it to exist, from the facts which are exhibited to me in the history of the world and the infallible record of divine knowledge; not as a certainty which at all excludes the concomitant ability of obedience; which excludes the power of breaking off from iniquity by returning to God; or which excludes the certainty of "multitudes whom no man can number" actually returning to the Lord on earth, through the influences of his Spirit, and praising Him with the celestial hosts before his throne in heaven. In the bosom of the church catholic, before her altars of devotion, and out of the records of her faith, have I learned the truth that man is exceeding corrupt and "very far gone from original righteousness." I take it for an undoubted certainty,

that each descendant of Adam will partake in this character-the very certainty in view of which the Lord, the messenger of the covenant, has visited his temple, with the annunciation of recovering grace to the Jew and the Gentile; and with the threatening to the despisers of this grace of irrevocable plagues beyond this life. This certainty I have endeavoured to trace up to a cause, (so far as an influential cause might be found in the system of created things,) existing in the very constitution which as moral beings we inherit from our original and sinning ancestor. Whether this be among opinions which the reviewer would characterize as "old fashioned and profitless," or not, I see no reason for discarding it from the articles of my belief. Old fashioned it may be; for truth herself is old, the attendant on all time, the daughter of eternity, the eldest on her embassy from the throne of God. Profitless it cannot be if truth proclaims it for on her embassy of light she is sent to vindicate the conduct of her God to the world, and invite the erring and the lost to a place in his family of love. E. T. F.

:

ADDRESS AT THE GRAVE OF M. VIN* CENT DE ST. LAURENT.

Address delivered on Saturday, May 7, 1825, in the Cemetery of l'Est, over the grave of M. Vincent de Saint Laurent, one of the VicePresidents of the Protestant Bible Society of Paris, in the name of the Committee of said Society, by J. J.

*M. Jacques Vincent Saint Laurent was born at Nismes in the department of Gard, January 9, 1758, and died at Paris, May 6, 1825. He was a member of the consistory of the reformed church of Paris, honorary member of the committee of its schools, member of the Royal Society of Agriculture, and correspondent

of the Institute of France, and of the Royal Academy of Inscriptions and Belles Lettres.

Goepp, Pastor of the Christian Church of the Augsburg Confession at Paris, one of the Vice-Presidents of the Bible Society. Translated for the Christian Spectator, from the Thirty-seventh Bulletin of the Protestant Bible Society of Paris, May, 1825, by JACOB PORTER.

"WHY, my brethren, at a ceremony like that which now calls us together in this solemn place, over the grave of so worthy a citizen as him whom we deplore, in the midst of so many more capable than myself, of honouring his memory, why should it be that my feeble voice must be heard on so melancholy an occasion? Why did the committee of the Bible Society of Paris, in whose name I now address you, choose so feeble an organ to express its regret on occasion of the death of one of its most distinguished members, of who was so dear to us all?

one

Alas! brethren, were there any one that is not painfully affected with every thing that a beloved church, with which we love to mingle our interests, deplores in the person of M. Vincent de Saint Laurent; any one, that is not feelingly alive to every thing that our society owes to this respectable man, to all the services that he has .successively rendered it in quality of one of its founders, of one of its secretaries and vice-presidents; to every thing that it loses in finding itself henceforth deprived of his intelligence and his zealous concurrence; such an one doubtless would acquit himself no better than I. But how much soever I am touched with the merits of this worthy member of our pious association, and how little soever I may be able to avail myself of them at this time of mourning, happily those among us, who were witnesses, have preserved and will always preserve, as well as myself, the grateful remembrance; to others I will say that the exalted wis

dom, the ardent love of virtue, and the enlightened piety, that they have seen him display in all the relations of life, and of which my respected brother, M. Juillerat Chasseur, has drawn a touching picture, these he has likewise displayed, in a most distinguishing manner, in the sacred work of disseminating our divine books.

Being perfectly acquainted with the spiritual wants of the Protestants in France, and bearing towards them a lively and tender affection, M. Vincent de Saint Laurent was among the first who desired the establishment, in the capital, of one of those societies by which the gospel of the Saviour of the world, with its heavenly light and cheering consolations, is spread, not only in the palaces of the rich, but above all in the cottages of those that bear the fatigue and heat of the day; among the first who laboured for it; and when his wishes were crowned with success, when the government, convinced of the utility of such a society, had authorized its formation, with what zeal did he assist in all its labours, in its progressive developement, in its ever beneficial operations? During the six years of its existence, a great part of the time of our venerable colleague was consecrated to its benevolent concerns. The greater part of its duties, and those precisely that required constant labour, devolved on him, and found him invariably devoted in his indefatigable co-operation. When, above all, his healthbecome more and more feeble,should have diverted him from its affairs, it was not possible for him to give himself that repose which his situation seemed to require,-that of being no more employed on an object, to which he attached the highest importance, so that, even to the time of his last sickness, which has brought us to this scene of mourning, we had the happiness

of seeing him seated in the midst of us, of profiting by his counsels and the wisdom of his directions. Af ter the example of the Saviour, whose footsteps, he loved to follow, "I must," said he, " do the works of him that sent me, while it is day; the night is coming when no one can work."

Alas! brethren, it is come, that night, which has brought to a close the terrestrial activity of our beloved friend, it is come, too soon for his family and his friends, too soon for us, his colleagues in the Biblical work, too soon for all those who had opportunity to appreciate his noble character, his elevated sentiments, his constantly liberal efforts. An excellent life was extinct; a mind rich in rare and most precious qualities, a mind endowed with eminent faculties left this world when our brother closed his dying eyes to the light of day. We cannot but be penetrated with the keenest sorrow at such a death. In our deliberations, over which his upright spirit, his various knowledge, his powerful eloquence, ex

ercised so happy an influence, his absence will be deeply felt, as well as in his church, in the circle of his friends, and in the bosom of his family.

But, brethren, in regretting the good, that has escaped us, having the delightful persuasion that qualities such as we have admired in our dear brother, cannot become the prey of the sepulchre; that, in a new and better world his noble faculties will be unfolded in a nobler manner, and take a more brilliant and rapid flight, we moderate our grief; we accompany with our blessings, before the throne of Jehovah, the righteous man, from whom death has separated us for a moment, we preserve the remembrance of him, we preserve it as a precious heritage, that he bequeathed us on quitting this earthly scene, and by which we may still profit; and over his grave we form the resolution to follow his excellent example, to imitate his ardent zeal, by doing good without weariness, so that, in due time, if we do not grow remiss, we may reap the fruit."

MISCELLANEOUS COMMUNICATIONS.

SPECIMENS OF CHINESE LITERA

TURE.

In looking over, a few years since, some Numbers of the Indo-Chi

nese Gleaner," published by the

missionaries at Malacca, some translations from the most celebrated

Professor Norton says of Mrs. Hemans, that she is "eminently a female writer." I trust therefore it will seem neither solecistical nor unintelligible for me to say of these extracts that they are eminently Chinese. There is about them, bad taste which we see in the picgenerally, the same incongruity and tures on Chinese porcelain. Some sentences are at once instructive

Specimens of Chinese Literature, struck my mind so forcibly that I was induced to make a few extracts. Within a few days, these extracts, after having slumbered among a mass of old papers, have met my eye once more. It occurred to me that they might make a page for the idler" in the Christian Spec- dence in thought and illustration. In a few instances the coinci

tator.

[ocr errors]

and truly beautiful. Others, designed to be equally beautiful and equally instructive, only divert us by their oddity.

« PreviousContinue »