صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

conceive to be erroneous, or misrepresented, will be granted them in the columns of the Christian Repository. For my own part, I conceive, it is better to open and investigate a difficulty, than attempt to smother what has already reached the public ear. If "Restorationist" has undertaken publicly to abuse a number of his brethren, let it be known, that he may be ashamed; but if they have exercised toward him and others an overbearing or improper spirit, defence is certainly their due. As it respects this subject, I consider myself under no responsibility. As it respects the subject of future punishment, my sentiments are well known, and if they are such as some of my brethren despise, I can no more come to them than they to me. It is humbly hoped, the spirit of mutual love and forbearance may yet be exercised among us, which shall enable us to repeat the words of the Lord Jesus with pleasure, "Hereby shall men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.-EDITOR."

For the Christian Repository.

TO THE WORLD.

The writer of this, and several of his brethren, who agree with him in opinion, have long viewed, with deep regret, the modern corruption of the genuine doctrine of the restoration of all men, and this corruption appearing to be seated and growing among the order of Universalists in the United States, and believing that it is a great hindrance to the reception and spread of the truth, as well as detrimental to the morals of community, consider it as a duty which they owe to God, their own consciences, and their fellow-creatures, to publish to the world the following declaration.

1. "That, in our opinion, the doctrine of universal salvation, at the commencement of a future state, and that of the final restoration of all men by Jesus Christ, through faith and repentance, are distinct and

different doctrines, and are incapable of being recon: ciled together."

2. "That we consider the former doctrine to be subversive of a just sense of our accountability to God, and the proper distinction between virtue and vice, and, consequently, lessens the motives to virtue, and gives force to the temptations of sin."

Explanatory Remarks.

The first article supposes a difference between the two systems in the method or means of salvation. The principle on which the doctrine of immediate universal salvation is founded, as far as we can learn from its advocates, is the native and essentially immaculate nature of the soul. The suffering of the soul wholly arises and is dependent on its union with its present body, and when that is dislodged, it is, of its essential nature, free from all pollution and suffering. This is no new theory, as it was embraced by many ancient heathen philosophers. Now, it requires no great capacity to perceive, that this doctrine sets. aside the scheme of salvation by Christ. I here speak of our eternal salvation after death. Christ may, to be sure, be the means of doing considerable good to a number of mankind in this world, by his instructions, &c. but, as it respects their future state, his office, as a Mediator, has no relation. They are necessarily happy from their very nature. In our opinion, therefore, this doctrine sets aside the great scheme of salva tion by Christ.

It is also easy to be seen, that this doctrine leaves out the means of faith and repentance, as requisites for the possession and enjoyment of salvation. Those who die impenitent are immediately introduced into a state of perfect happiness and glory, not because they were previously prepared by the exercise of faith and repentance, but from the very nature of their existence, which will not admit any suffering. To talk of their exercising faith and repentance after death, and when they have come into the actual possession of

their native glory, would be altogether absurd, as well as tacitly to give up the principle on which their salvation is predicated.

I need not here add, that the Bible knows of no method of salvation only by Christ, and through the means of faith and repentance. This is our only. ground and hope of salvation. Hence the conclusion, that the doctrine of immediate universal salvation, and that which we advocate, are distinct systems, and incapable of being reconciled together.

The second article is expressive of our opinion of the doctrine of immediate universal salvation. We believe that mankind are accountable to God for all their actions, and will be punished for all those which are sinful, here or hereafter. We believe that this fact is demonstrated by the Bible and universal experience. Now, the above stated doctrine we conceive to be inconsistent with this. By that we are taught, that men who die in the actual perpetration of crimes, immediately enter a state of absolute happiness, and, consequently, they are not rendered accountable, at least for all their sins. If they are punished for their sins, generally, through life, they are not punished for the last. Thus we think that this doctrine is subversive of a just sense of our accountability to God.

The

proper distinction between virtue and vice, consists in a just reward of the one and the punishment of the other. This retribution, at least, in many cases, as we have seen, does not take place in this world. Therefore, the doctrine in question, which admits all characters alike to heaven, at death, is subversive of a just distinction between virtue and vice.

That this doctrine lessens the motives to virtue, is very apparent. For, on our scheme, virtue not only has the promise of all the pleasure which attends the way of well-doing here, but distinguished rewards. beyond death. There can be no question, therefore, but that the motives to virtue are much greater and stronger on our scheme, than on that which teaches, that all the reward of virtue is limited to this life.

That the doctrine of immediate universal salvation gives force to the temptations of sin, we think is evident from a moment's reflection. The robber may go forth in his wicked designs of plunder and murder, and rest assured that, if he loses his life in one of his adventures, he shall immediately be beyond the reach of all punishment, and enjoy perfect happiness. The man in trouble may end his sorrows by suicide, and instantly reach the pure abodes of heavenly felicity. If it be not certain that such a doctrine as this, gives force to the temptations of sin, there is no moral certainty upon any subject whatever.

These brief remarks are no more than what the explanation of our declaration required, and with these we are willing to submit it to an impartial public. But, if it be necessary, we are willing to go further in our justification. If this should be attacked in any public journals, we shall expect the Editors of such journals will have the politeness to offer their columns for its defence.

We make this solemn declaration of our views in the fear of God, and with a humble hope that it may subserve the interest of truth.

Signed, by the request and in behalf of others, JACOB WOOD.

P. S. The respective Editors of the "Universalist Magazine," "Christian Intelligencer," and "Religious Inquirer," are requested to insert the above in their periodical works. J. W.

ONCE MORE ON THE SUBJECT OF HYRAM'S CONTROVERSY.

On the subject of this controversy, the Editor of the Magazine has addressed a short piece to me, probably, in allusion to my last, in which he states; "If you will be so kind, sir, as to give the above a place in the Repository, neither Hyram nor yourself will be troubled with any thing further on this subject from The

Editor of the Philadelphia Universalist Magazine." On this request, I must beg the indulgence of my brother Editor, in refusing him a place in the Repository; and for the following reasons: First, he appears disposed to ask inore than he is willing to give; and, second, he has offered some ideas that I am not disposed to admit without remarks, which, if I should offer, would be entering myself into a controversy that I had before expressed a wish to have closed, and which also belonged to Hyram, and not to me. On Hyram's request, he says, "To this I should have no objection, if we had sufficient room, tho he must excuse me, when I say, that in my opinion, his arguments are too loose and inconclusive to be very interesting to my readers." Respecting "room," our readers are informed that the Magazine contains twice the number of sheets of the Repository.. The remark, "too loose and inconclusive to be very interesting," I think would have appeared better from some other pen, than from one of the disputants. It is not to be expected that controversial writers will view their opponents compact and conclusive in their arguments. If this were the case, they could have, in their feelings, no just reason to oppose. It was, therefore, hoped that such remarks would have been spared, and each writer allowed to stand or fall, according to the merit or want of merit in his labors. Our views of argument are so various, that if "loose and inconclusive," be the criterion of refusing writings on controversy, however precious my brother Editor's writings may be in his own eyes, they would long ago have been excluded from the columns of the Repository. But it was conceived no more than fair, that both sides of the question should be heard, and if my brother has been disputing with an opponent that he is ashamed of, and is not willing to bring up his end of the yoke, it only remains for him to back out the best way he

can.

It is hoped my brother will not consider these remarks as tokens of a want of personal esteem, but

« السابقةمتابعة »