o^ n Viii)- PRINCETON, N. J. i-/^^^- Division . Section____ Number % 41. •/ POSTHUMOUS ¥OEKS OP THE / EEV. THOMAS "CHAIMEES, B.D., Ll.D. EDITED BY THE REY. WILLIAM HANNA, LL.D. VOL. VII. NEW YOUK: HARPER & BROTHERS, PUBLISHERS, 82 CLIFF STREET. 184 9. INSTITUTES OF THEOLOG-Y BY THE LATE THOMAS CHALMERS, D.D., LL.D, IN TWO VOLUMES. VOL. I. NEW YORK: HARPER & BROTHERS, PUBLISHERS, 82 CLIFF STREET. 18 4 9. CONTENTS. BOOK I.— GENERAL AND INTRODUCTORY. CHAPTER I. Page Preliminary Ethics 21 CHAPTER n. Preliminary Metaphysics and Mental Physics 45 CHAPTER HI. On Certain Initial Considerations present to every Mind, and which lay the Obhgatiou upon all of giving to Religion their serious Entertainment 70 BOOK II.— NATURAL THEOLOGY. CHAPTER I. Proofs from External Nature for the Being of a God SO CHAPTER n. Proofs from the Constitution of the Human Mind, and from its Relations to External Nature, for the Being and Character of God 117 CHAPTER in. On the Degree of Light which Natural Theology casts, and the Uncertainty in which it leaves both the Purposes of God and the future Destinies of Man , 1 35 vi CONTENTS. BOOK III.— EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. CHAPTER I. Page Certain Prefatory Reasonings ....».,.. 156 CHAPTER 11. On the General Evidence of History ♦••• 175 CHAPTER HI On the Internal Historical Evidence for the Truth of Christianity ................ i .. . 193 CHAPTER IV. On the External Historical Evidence for the Tmth of Christianity 213 CHAPTER V. Some Remarks on the Evidence of Prophecy 234 CHAPTER VI. On the Moral and Exp erimental Evidences for the Truth of Christianity 247 CHAPTER VII. General Review of a previous Work on the Evidences of Christianity 266 CHAPTER VIII. General Application of our Views on the Evidences of Natural and Revealed Religion. , 276 CHAPTER IX. On Scripture Cnticism. 299 CHAPTER X. On Systematic Theology. . = ..<• c. .... « ....«......., = .........,...,....,,...,.,.,. . 353 CONTENTS. vii SUBJECT-MATTER OF CHRISTIANITY. PART I.— ON THE DISEASE FOR WHICH THE GOSPEL REMEDY IS PROVIDED. CHAPTER I. Page Reasons why Man's State of Guilt and moral Depravation should form the Initial Doc- trine of a Systematic Course on the Subject- Matter of Christianity 387 CHAPTER II. On the Moral State of Man as found by Observation 394 CHAPTER III. On the Moral State of Man as affirmed in Scripture 407 CHAPTER IV. On the Scriptural Account of the Origin of Human Depravity 437 CHAPTER V. On the Guilt of Man as charged upon him by his own Natural Conscience 462 CHAPTER VI. On the Guilt of Man as charged upon him by Scripture 474 CHAPTER VII. On the Reciprocal and Conjunct Influences which the Light of Nature and the Light of Revelation have upon each other 500 CHAPTER VIII. On the Practical and Pulpit Treatment of this Subject. 519 INTRODUCTION. In his first delivered Course of Theological Lectures, after treating of Natural Theology and the Evidences of Christianity, Dr. Chalmers entered upon the subject of the Character and Constitution of the Godhead. At the close, however, of his discussion of the doctrine of the Trinity, he declared it to be his purpose to depart from that order of topics which writers on systematic divinity had so generally pursued — an order which he himself had so far tested, and with which he had been disappointed — and to follow another in its stead, of whose superiority he became afterwards growingly convinced, and which he finally adopted, when, transcribing his lectures for the press, he molded them into the form in which they are now presented to the public. As the most suitable intro- duction to the present volume, there is inserted here the explanation and defense of his relinquishment of the old method and adoption of the new, as given to his students at the time of the change, in a Lecture entitled — ON THE RIGHT ORDER OF A THEOLOGICAL COURSE. I am tempted to address you upon this subject, because the suspicion which I ventured to express at the com- mencement of the session, on the common arrangements INTRODUCTION. of our science, has of late obtained what I feel to be an experimental verification. You may recollect the men- tion I made some considerable time ago of two different orders in which the lessons of the Christian theology- might be delivered, and the principle of each of them re- spectively.^ The one proceeds chronologically in the order of the Divine administration, beginning with the constitution of the Godhead, and proceeding onward through the successive footsteps of a history which com- mences with the original purposes of the uncreated mind, and terminates in the consummation of all things. The other proceeds chronologically in the natural order of hu- man inquiry, beginning, therefore, with the darkness and the probabilities and the wants of natural theology, and after having ascertained the Scripture to be a real com- munication from heaven to earth, seeking first after those announcements that are most directly fitted to relieve the distress and to meet the difficulties of nature. It is thus that in entering upon the record the first thing that would naturally attract the notice, is the confirmation which it lends to the apprehensions and the anxieties of nature respecting the fearful extent both of man's deprav- ity and of his danger ; whence we should proceed to a consideration of the offered remedy ; whence to the means by which that remedy is appropriated ; whence to its operation both in reconciling God to man, and regener- ating man in the likeness of God ; whence to the progress- ive holiness of the life ripening and maturing, under the influence of the truths of Christianity, for the exercises and joys of a blissful eternity ; whence to death and judgment, and the respective destinies of those who have * See the Preface to the first volume of Dr. Chalmers' Works. INTRODUCTION. embraced the gospel of Jesus Christ and those who have rejected it. You will perceive, that under these two dis- tinct arrangements the topics follow each other in a very diiferent order of succession. We all along were suspi- cious of the first, though it be the very order of almost all the confessions and catechisms of Europe, and of the great majority of our authors, whether in the controver- sial or the systematic theology. Yet with all these au- thorities on its side, we have ever distrusted the first, and can now say that our entire, our decided preference, is for the second. You will observe that there is much the same differ- ence between these two methods as there is between the synthetic and the analytic processes in the exposition of any other science. By the synthetic, you begin, as in geometry, with the elementary principles, and out of these you compound the ultimate doctrines or conclusions of the science. By the analytic, you begin with the objects or the phenomena which first solicit your regards, and these by comparison and abstraction you are enabled to resolve into their principles. It is evident that the syn- thetic treatment demands a full and thorough and confi- dent acquaintance with the subject-matter to which it is applied, and withal a clear and correct notion of the primitive elements that enter into the investigation, lest in the stream of ratiocination downward some original flaw in the premises shall be found to vitiate every de- duction that may have issued from an infected fountain- head. The analytic, again, is more applicable to a sub- ject where, instead of having the principles to set out with, you have the principles to seek, and so beginning with the phenomena that are most palpable or nearest at INTRODUCTION. hand, you, by a reverse process, end where the other be- gins. This latter mode is surely the fitter for a science beset on either side with mysteries unfathomable — a science all whose light breaks in upon us by partial and imperfect disclosures, and where we vainly try to find a ligament or connecting principle between one ascertained truth and another. With such a science we should feel inclined to proceed modo indagandi rather than modo demonstrandi. And theology we hold to be pre-eminently such a science — a science whose initial elements we can not pluck from the dark recesses of the eternity that is past, and whose ultimate conclusions we can not follow to the like dark and distant recesses of the eternity before us, and which we can therefore only explore to the con- fines of the light that has been made to shine around us. There it is our duty to stop, intruding not into the things which we have not seen, and to wait in humble expec- tancy for the day of a larger and a brighter manifestation. Now we can not but think it a violation of this prin- ciple, that so early a place should be given to the doc- trine of the Trinity in the common expositions of theology. It seems to have been a very general conception that this was the way to begin at the beginning ; or, in other words, after having, by a transcendental flight, assumed our station at the top of the ladder, to move through the series of its descending steps instead of climbing upward from the bottom of it. Our movement, we think, should be in the last direction. We should feel our way up- ward, and not, as if already in possession of the summit, march with a look of command and an air of demonstra- tive certainty to the subordinate and dependent places which are beneath us. We greatly fear that a wrong INTRODUCTION. commencement and a wrong direction may have infected with a certain presumptuous and a priori spirit the whole of our theology, and that we address ourselves to its high investigations more with the conscious mastery of one who, as from an eminence, eyes far and wide the prospect that is around him, than in the attitude of humble in- quirers into the word of God. This consideration is greatly strengthened by the rela- tion in which the Natural stands to the Christian theol- ogy. It is wrong to say of the one that it is the basis of the other ; but certain it is, that under the promptings of the one we feel our way to the other. We think that there is enough of light in the natural conscience to awaken the sense of guilt, and to suggest the moral, to all appearance the impracticable, difficulty which stands in the way of the sinner's acceptance with God. This is the great difficulty in which Natural theology leaves us, and this is the very difficulty which Christianity takes up and relieves at the very outset of its proposals to the world. This I hold to be the great place of junction be- tween the Natural and the Christian theology, and we just follow in a continuous path when we step over from the difficulty in which the one lands us to the counterpart solution which the other oifers us, from the cry of distress emitted by nature to the response wherewith that cry is appeased in the gospel of Jesus Christ. In other words, it is only now that we have come in sight of the place at which Natural theology breaks off, and to the place from which the Christian theology takes up the inquirer, and carries him forward along the line of her revelations, meeting him first with the disclosure of the way of his acceptance, and thence passing on with other doctrines INTRODUCTION. and disclosures that stand related to the still higher ob- ject of his practical education for the joys and the exer- cises of heaven. Between the Natural and the Christian theology there behoved to be interposed our inquiry into the credentials of the Bible ; but between the last and greatest desideratum of the Natural, and the counterpart doctrine of the Christian theology, there ought not to have been interposed the doctrine of the Trinity. You will remember, that at the commencement of our Natural theology, I first conceived the lowest possible state of notion or belief on the subject of a God, and then tried to demonstrate that even here there were certain religious imaginations or thoughts, to which there were certain religious duties that corresponded. There is thus an ample principle of inquiry at the very outset, under which one might conceive all the argumentations and surmises of the Natural theology to be gone through, till we have arrived at the utmost conjectures or discoveries which it is capable of making. But when we have reached thus far, instead of being landed in a state of satisfaction and repose, we find ourselves in the midst of h^avy and unresolved difficulties, which create an unsated appetency for more of light and information than nature can supply. Now, I like, when entering on the subject- matter of Christianity, to take up first with those infor- mations which nature most needs, and which nature, when morally awakened to a sense of her necessities, is most desirous of. I like thus to connect the interroga- tions of the Natural with the responses of the Christian theology ; and that the science, instead of being described in the order of the history of God, beginning, therefore, with the constitution, and proceeding onward to the pur- INTRODUCTION. poses and the acts and the dispensations, in chronological series, of the uncreated mind, should be described rather in the order of the history of man, beginning with the alienation and darkness of his moral nature, and proceed- ing onward through those truths which, acting success- ively upon him, introduce him to reconciliation with his Maker, and advance him to the condition of a blissful eternity. I am satisfied that this less ambitious way of it is better suited to the real state of the science, and that much of the intolerance, and much of the unwarrantable dogmatism of our systematic theology is owing to the synthetic style of our demonstrations. We prefer a surer though an humbler pathway ; and one of its principal charms is, that the order of our theoretical will thus be made to quadrate with the order of our practical Christ- ianity. Our first doctrines will be those which meet the anxieties of the spirit in quest of peace with God. The second, those which guide the disciple's way along the progressive holiness that qualifies him for the pleasures and the companionships of Paradise. And the third, those higher and transcendental themes which sublime the con- templation both of the saint and of the scholar, and shed a certain mystic glory over the whole system of Christian- ity— themes of which Scripture hath given decisive infor- mation, though in respect of nature and principle they are above the grasp of every earthly understanding, and so sin- gularly suited to exercise the faith and the wisdom of those who are satisfied to know all that the Bible tells of them, and to wait for their fuller revelation in heaven. The doctrine of the Trinity, we apprehend, and more especially when made the subject of a critical or scientific treatment, belongs not to the first, but to the last of these divisions. xvi INTRODUCTION. For a far ulterior, perhaps even an ultimate topic in the subject-matter of Christianity, I can not conceive a fitter doctrine than the Trinity, as a sort of high and concluding exercise in the science. There is such clear and resistless scriptural evidence in behalf of the separate propositions, and at the same time something so imprac- ticable to reason in the attempt to reconcile them, that I know of no subject on which the soundness of one's Christian philosophy is brought more decisively to the test. It requires the function of a much finer discern- ment than belongs unfortunately to the bulk of theolo- gians to know when to stop upon this subject, and to separate the unmixed truth which is in it from the gra- tuitous speculation. I can not imagine a more befitting theme by which to try both our supreme respect for the deliverances of Scripture, along with utter distrust in our own powers, when directed to a matter that lies immeas- urably beyond the farthest outskirts of that domain which is accessible to the human faculties. And then both for the varied Scripture criticism which the question demands, and also for the insight which it gives into the principles and even the errors of the orthodox, we know of none more deeply interesting to the theological student, who can not fail, from a thorough discussion of it, to learn much on the way of settling opinions in theology by Bib- lical interpretation, and much on the history and progress of opinions in the Church. It is a question, then, which forms an indispensable part of your professional literature. On this we hold no dispute — our only doubt was as to the rightness of the common arrangement ; and we now, with a confidence which, in the face of so many authori- ties and examples, we really could not have felt till we INTRODUCTION. had made the trial, must declare it as our purpose in all time coming to advance it to a greatly posterior, if not to the concluding place of all in the order of your theo- logical studies. Let it not be imagined that we overlook the moral im- portance of the doctrine, or regard it as of no effect or signification in respect of influence on the other doctrines which we propose to treat before it. For example, we hold it to be of mighty operation and power in enhancing every practical sentiment connected with our faith in the atonement ; and should not this, it may be thought, give it a precedency in the order of our discussions ? To meet this it should be recollected, on the other hand, that the doctrine of the atonement is admitted to have some in- fluence on the argumentations in behalf of the Trinity ; but the true reply in this and every other case is, that long anterior to the scientific establishment of any important doctrine whatever in Christianity, we have, in the broad and general aspect of revelation, a sufficiency of evidence for believing it. We might with all safety, for example, assume the divinity of Christ, not, it is true, for the pur- pose of demonstrating the truth of His propitiatory sacri- fice, but for the purpose of exalting either our confidence in its efficacy, or our gratitude for the condescension of so high a service. This we might do on the strength of those patent evidences which may be gathered in behalf of every momentous truth in religion from almost any popular translation of the Scriptures, adjourning in the mean time its critical defense and establishment to a pos- terior stage in the course. I have often said that in Scripture criticism the great object is not to discover but to defend ; and for any other purpose than that of argu- r INTRODUCTION. ment or demonstration, for the purpose of a moral or practical effect, we might avail ourselves of our discov- eries now, and defend afterwards. There is nothing unfair or illogical in this management, and it is a man- agement for which our science possesses peculiar suscep- tibilities. In treating, for example, of the atonement, we shall just advert as much or as little to the divinity of the Son of God and the divinity of the Holy Spirit, with these topics being discussed at the termination, as if discussed at the commencement of the course. We hold it incumbent upon us to vindicate one and all of the truths of Christianity, on the principles of solid crit- icism, against the adverse representations of heretics ; but this ought not to affect the order of exposition in theology, nor does it present any adequate reason why the doctrine of man's moral character should not occupy the first place, and the doctrine of God's mysterious con- stitution the last place in the argumentations of our science. It may be thought, however, that the effect of our whole argument is to establish the directest possible censure upon ourselves, seeing that we plead against an arrangement which hitherto we ourselves have ob- served, and for an arrangement which ourselves have unquestionably violated. In mitigation of the charge, we may state in the general, that professors, like other people, have just to feel their way to what is best ; and more especially when the meditated step is a departure from the established order, it is infinitely better that instead of being precipitately done, we should wait the slow results of observation, and have somewhat like the firmness of an experimental basis to rest upon. It took INTRODUCTION. Dr. Adam Ferguson twenty years ere his course settled down in that very order which conclusively satisfied him ; and in a chapter of Smith's " Wealth of Nations," we have an admirable account of the successive modelings and remodelings, session after session, by which the pro- fessor ripens the work of his class-room into a state of enduring excellence. Besides, we could not, without the satisfaction of a previous trial, contravene the order of every system and every text-book in theology that we are yet acquainted with, or propose to deliver the lessons of the science by a different succession of topics from that in which Calvin and Turretin, Pictetus and Vitringa, have delivered them. Therefore it was that after taking leave of the Natural theology, we lifted ourselves up by a transcendental movement to the most transcendental of all the topics in the Christian theology. I felt the violence of the disruption, and, what was still more painful, had no doubt that the vast majority, if not the whole of the class, felt it along with me. It is any thing but a good introduction to the scientific study of Christ- ianity, to lay hold, in the first instance, of that topic j . which, among all others, presents the aspect of an im- practicable enigma, and to unravel which we have to clear our way through a ceaseless mass of creeds and criticisms, the products either of modern sophistry or of ancient and scholastic barbarism. I felt a want of sym- pathy, and what is more, I dreaded the mischief an minds yet unpracticed in the science ; and though the expres- sion be stronger than you perhaps can enter into, yet it is not stronger than to adequately convey my own sen- sations, when, on comparing this intermediate period with the genial topics of our introductory months, and the INTRODUCTION. still more genial topics on which we now expatiate, I offered you my sincere congratulations in that we had traversed the horrors of the middle passage. We may as well have a middle passage no longer ; and I would far rather give the whole discussion a separate place in an appendix to the Course, than admit it as a constituent part at an early stage of it. "We make the alteration, but not, you will allow, till after the substantial justice and the decent formalities of a full and lengthened trial. We are glad to quit the region of transcendentals, and alight upon earth among the wants, and the feelings, and the moral aspirations of our own familiar nature. Instead of looking first to Christianity at the place where it retires into the viewless unknown of immensity, we look to it at the place where it bears on the urgent necessities of the human spirit, and holds forth an asylum to weary and heavy-laden men — instead of holding converse with her in dark cabalistic phraseology about the inaccessible se- crets of heaven, we are to hold converse with her about the duties and the destinies of our own species. What a mighty refreshment to the spirit when it thus descends from the mysteries which are far out of view, and of which it can know nothing, to the matters that lie within the reach of its discernment, and on its knowledge of which there hinges the interest of its eternity ! IISTITUTES OF THEOLOGY BOOK I. GENERAL AND INTRODUCTOUY. CHAPTER I. PRELIMINARY ETHICS. 1. One science might advantageously be the object of our preHminary attention before entering on the study of another, although the latter should not be dependent on the former for its main evidence, or for the stability of the foundation on which it rests. It might bewell, notv^^ithstanding, for the mind to have been previously furnished v^^ith the viev^s and principles of the first at the commencement of its sys- tematic inquiries into the second, even though no single proposition in the acquired science should be so related to any doctrine of the one that is yet before us, as the premise of an argument is to its conclusion. The study of the Nat- ural is rightly held a proper introduction to the study of the Christian Theology — although the latter, with its own peculiar lights and its own proper evidences, is certainly not based upon the former in the same way that any system of truth is based on its first and fundamental principles. It may be right for the student to traverse the one theology, ere that, as a student, he makes ingress either on the evi- dences or subject-matter of the other. And, in like manner, it might prove in the highest degree serviceable that in the order of the sciences the study of ethics should be anterior to the study of both these theologies — of the greatest use, it may be, both in guiding us over the new field of investiga- INSTITUTES OF THEOLOGY. tion, and determining the best points of view from which to look at the objects there set before us, while these objects at the same time may be seen in their own proper light, and be shone upon by an independent evidence of their own. Were the dependence of the one science upon the other, in all its parts and propositions, a strictly logical one, then, whatever of doubt or obscurity rested on the one, would, in the process of deduction, be necessarily communicated to the other also. We disclaim all such connection between the human science of ethics and the divine science, if not of the natural, at least of the revealed theology ; nor does it follow that, because moral philosophy is in the order of scholarship a fit precursor to the divinity of our halls and colleges, that therefore the mist of its controverted ques- tions, the subtlety, and so the skepticism of its yet unsettled disputations, shall bedim those truths which we behold in the light of heaven, and which have been made known to us on the faith of satisfying credentials by an authentic and authoritative voice from the upper sanctuary.* 2. Nevertheless there are certain important bearings in which the propositions — even the yet unresolved questions of ethical science — stand to theology ; and of these we now proceed to give a few specimens. 3. The first of these questions that we shall notice is perhaps the most general and elementary of them all, as it respects the very substance or ground of morality, and may be put in this form — Wherein is it that the rightness of morality lies ? or, whence is it that this rightness is derived ? Whether, more particularly, it have an independent rightness of its own, or it be right only because God wills it ? It might be proper to state that between the two terms of the alternative as last put, our clear preference — or rather, our absolute and entire conviction — is on the side of the former. We hold that morality has a stable, inherent, and essential rightness in itself, and that anterior to or apart from, whether the tacit or expressed will of any being in the universe — * Natural Theology not the logical basis of the Christian, but an impellent to the inquiry after it, — See Gal. iii. 23, 24. PRELIMINARY ETHICS. 23 that it had a subsistence and a character before that any creatures were made who could be the subjects of a will or a government at all, and when no other existed beside God Himself to exemphfy its virtues and it-s graces. We, on the one hand, do not deny that it is absolutely and in itself right to obey the will of God, when we deny the assertion of certain moralists who tell us of all virtue that it is right only because God wills it — while they, on the other hand, cannot escape from the concession that there is at least one virtue which has this rightness in itself, and that is obedience to the Divine will ; for if asked why is it right to obey God's will, they cannot run it up by the endlessly-repeating process of making always the same thing the reason or principle of itself, but must stop short at the conclusion that there is a rightness in the very nature of the thing, and that irrespective of anything different from or anterior to itself into which it can be resolved. But even after this matter has been adjusted, there remains this essential dif- ference betwixt us. They might allow that in the virtue of obedience to God there is a native and independent rightness ; but that no other virtue has this property, for that this obedience is comprehensive of all virtue, and that every other morality which can be named is virtuous only because God, the sovereign Legislator, in framing the arti- cles of His own code of government or law, hath so ordained it. Now it is here that we join issue with our antagonists, and affirm that God is no more the Creator of virtue than He is of truth — that justice and benevolence were virtues previous to any forthputting of will or jurisprudence on His part, and that He no more ordained them to be virtues, than He ordained that the three angles of a triangle should be equal to two right angles. The moral and the mathe- matical propositions have been alike the objects of the divine approbation and the divine perception from all eter- nity ; but He no more willed the rightness of the one or the reahty of the other, than He willed Himself into being, or willed what should be the virtues of His own character, or what the constitution of His own understanding. There 24 INSTITUTES OF THEOLOGY. is a wrong order Iq the conceptions of those moralists who resolve the virtuousness of moraUty either in respect of its essence or its foundation into the law of God. 4. The resolution of all virtue into the will of God has been designated the theological system of morals, and they who hold it have had the title given to them of theological moralists. Whether this have been meant as a stigma on our profession or not, the principle on which it has been affixed to us is one that we disclaim as alike inconsistent with sound ethics and sound theology. We can never con- sent to a proposition so monstrous as that, if an arbitrary God had chosen to reverse all the articles of the decalogue, He would thereby have presented the universe with a re- verse morality that should be henceforth binding in point of duty and rectitude on all His creatures. Vice and virtue cannot thus be made to change places at the will or by the ordination of any power, whether dependent, or original and uncreated ; and the same God of whom it has been so emphatically said that He cannot lie, can neither alter the characteristics nor repeal the obligations of a morality which is immutable and everlasting. 5. And let it not be said that we hereby detract from the high prerogatives of the Eternal, or exalt a mere abstraction over the living Deity, by saying of morahty that it is prior to His will and independent of His ordination. We disso- ciate not virtue from the Godhead — for apart from Him, it is but a shadowy and abstract conception existing only in the region of the ideal ; and nowhere but in His character, unchanged and unchangeable, has it existed from everlast- ing as a concrete and substantive reality. In the Divinity alone it is that virtue has its fountainhead and its being — not, however, in the fountainhead of the divine will ; but higher than this and anterior to this, in the fountainhead of the divine nature. It is not the will of God which deter- mines His nature ; but the nature of God which determines His will. That is a code of pure and perfect righteousness which is graven on the tablet of the divine jurisprudence. But it did not originate there, for there it is but a transcript PRELIMINARY ETHICS. 25 from the prior tablet of the divine character. Virtue is not right because God wills it, but God wills it because it is right. The moral has antecedency to the juridical — having had its stable and everlasting residence in the constitution of the Deity, before that He w^illed it into a law for the government of His creatures.* 6. This argument is alike applicable both to the creden- tials of Revelation and to its practical lessons. For one can image a professed message from heaven resting its preten- sions on the evidence of undoubted miracles, yet in its sub- ject-matter palpably and glaringly immoral. There would be no perplexity in this, if we could believe that it was the law of God which constituted morality — for w^hatever the character of those mandates might be which came to us from the upper sanctuary, the very fact of their issuing thence could of itself turn vice into virtue, and sanctify every utterance that thus fell upon the world, because with a voice of authority from the throne of God. But if moral- ity be not thus the creature of ordination, if it be fixed and everlasting as is the nature of Deity itself, and if the image of God in which man was formed, not yet altogether effaced, still remain with him in some of its lights and lineaments- then might he, too, recognize that, and nothing else, to be righteous, which has been the object of God's perfect dis- cernment and perfect love from all eternity. There might thus have arisen a serious and inextricable dilemma, had the external revelation come into conflict w^ith the internal sense in a man's own breast of what is morally good or morally evil. If, in opposition to our mathematical sense, we had been told by one in the character of a prophet, and who worked miracles in support of his claim, that two and two made five — the very announcement would have dark- ened all the prior evidences of his mission, and thrown us back if not into a state of positive disbelief, at least of dis- tressing skepticism. And the same would ensue, if in op- * The morally right is anterior to law, nay, was exemplified from all eter- nity in the nature before it was enacted by the will and authority of God. Psalm cxvi. 5 ; xix. 8 ; Eph. vi. 1 ; Phil, iv. 8. VOL. VII. — B 26 INSTITUTES OF THEOLOGY, position to our moral sense, cruelty or falsehood or injustice had been canonized and enjoined as virtues. It is thus that our present argument bears directly on the proofs of rev- elation, and lays open at least one ligament of connection between ethics and theology. Should the morals and mira- cles of the gospel stand to each other as opposing forces — the one might neutralize the other •, and the whole external evidence of the record be nullified by the internal difficul- ties which lay in its subject-matten But if, instead of this, they operate as conspiring forces — if, besides the historical evidence for its miracles, we can allege the purity and ex- cellence of its morals, then instead of a balance ending per- haps in a cancelment or mutual destruction, there might be a summation of arguments ; and the conviction grounded on the testimonies both of first and of subsequent witnesses, be enhanced by other reasons drawn from other and dis- tinct quarters of contemplation, 7. But the speculation which now engages us is not only applicable to the object of settling our belief in the truth of the Christian revelation, it is alike applicable to the work -^ of urging and enforcing its lessons. The rightness, the ab- solute and independent rightness, of any grace or virtue, is not to be lost sight of by the preachers of gospel morality; for certainly it w^as not lost sight of by the first teachers and apostles of our faith — ^it being not only present as a con- sideration to their own minds, but urged as a motive on the observance of their disciples — " Children, obey your parents in the Lord, /or this is right" Nothing can be more un- questionable than the rightness of our obedience to God ; and this singly, or of itself, is sufficient to infuse the element of moral obligation into every mandate which proceedetb from His mouth. But even in the eye of His own messen- gers, this did not overshadov/ the native and inherent right- ness of that which is enjoined by Him ; and so, instead of resting exclusively on the naked authority of God, we find them making a direct appeal to the moral judgments of men — mingling as it were the transcendental light of heaven with the light of nature in human consciences ; and meeting PRELIMINARY ETHICS. 27 with a response and a manifestation there, when they dealt in those lessons, which were not only backed by all the au- thority of that inspiration wherewith they were charged, but the rightness of which might without inspiration be read and recognized of all men. There is an obvious respect both for the voice within the heart of individual man, and for the collective voice of society in the following memorable de- liverance— " Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report, if there be any vir- tue and if there be any praise, think on these things." 8. The next theory of virtue which we propose briefly to consider, is the utilitarian system of morals, based on the experience that nothing is morally good which is not useful — an experience which even though it held universally, does not of itself warrant the conclusion which has been raised upon it — that it is the usefulness of any given act or habit which constitutes its virtuousness, or in which its virtuous- ness altogether lies. This was strenuously advocated by Hume, and is identically the system of our present utilitari- ans. The elements of its conclusive refutation are to be found in the Sermons of Bishop Butler. But our object at present is not so much to estimate the soundness of any ethical dogma, as to point out the bearing which its subject- matter has on the science of theology. 9. This system is subject to the like modifications with that which we have already considered, and which has been denominated or stigmatized as the theological system of morals. It is true that to do the will of God is a virtue, yet it follows not that in this and this alone the rightness of all virtue lies ; and it is also true that God wills all virtue, yet it follows not that all morality is virtuous only because God wills it. In like manner, to do or desire that which is useful is one of the virtues, and one of high eminence in the scale, but it may not on that account form the essence or constituting quality of all the virtues ; and it may be also true, that all virtue is useful, and yet that much of virtue has a rightness and obligation in itself apart from its usefulness. 2g IxNSTITUTES OF THEOLOGY. With these points of analogy, however, between the two systems, there is one respect in which they differ most glar- ingly. In the first, God is regarded by its advocates as all in all, and rightly, had they .but kept free of their mistake in dating the origin of morality from the will of God, when they should have dated it from His uncreated and essential nature. In the second, God may be said to be altogether excluded, there being no account taken by its disciples of either His character or will. We have but to imagine our- selves placed under a different economy, with such other laws, whether of the mental or material constitution, as that vice should yield a greater amount of happiness than virtue — and then virtue and vice would instantly change places. Morality, instead of being referred to the pre-existent char- acter of God, or being the prescription of divine authority, becomes the mere product of human experience — what man finds to be most useful being the rule and the standard of duty. The former has been called the theological system of morals. It might be harsh to denominate the other the atheistical system of morals ; but certain it is that its prin- ciples, and all the materials for its regular construction, can be found and put together without so much as the recogni- tion of a God. It were a system which might be fi'amed by atheists, though in itself so defective and unpractical as not to be the best fitted for meeting the exigencies even of a state of atheism. 10. On this question, too, there hinges an argument for a God, which is either nullified or made good according as it is determined — whether morality lies in usefulness alone, or, in itself the object of our simple and direct perception, it has an underived primary and peculiar character of its own? Should the former opinion be adopted, then to affirm the usefulness of morality, is but to affirm an identical proposi- tion— a mere verbal or logical or necessary truism, from which no inference can be drawn. Should the other and we hold the sounder opinion be adopted — then to affirm the usefulness of morality is to affirm the actual conjunction of two different things, which are separable in idea, and might PRELIMINARY ETHICS. 29 have been separate in fact, but for the determination of that power which hath ordained the laws and the connections of our actual universe. If righteousness on the one hand, and usefulness on the other, be two distinct categories — then, not in their unity, but in their union, do we behold a contin- gency which of itself affords the glorious manifestation of a presiding morahty in the system of our w^orld. If it indeed be true that a universal virtue would, under the actual econ- omy of things, bring a universal happiness in its train, and that generally the miseries and manifold discomforts of hu- man existence can be traced to deviations from the rule of rectitude — there cannot be a more complete experimental demonstration of the regimen under which we live being indeed a regimen of virtue. But virtue by itself is but an abstraction, a character which without a being is efficient of nothing, but which as the efficient cause of the system in which we are placed, and all the laws and tendencies of which are so palpably on the side of righteousness, infers a real and living and withal a righteous sovereign. The util- itarian system of morals would make this argument void, or at least cast an obscuration over it, while the orthodox and accredited system restores to it that full effect and clearness and significancy which makes it distinctly available for the demonstration of a God. This affords another specimen of the bearing which subsists between these cognate themes of academic discipline and instruction — or another proof how intimately blended the two sciences of ethics and the- ology are with each other. 11. If utility be virtue, then, in some other economy of things taken at random, it is imaginable both of mind and matter as so differently constituted, that society might have found its greatest happiness in a morality the reverse in all its characteristics to that which now commands and unites the suffrages of mankind. At this rate the moral is but the handmaid of the physical; and virtue becomes a mere de- rivative— a manufacture out of the existent materials and laws of the actual system, whatever that may be. It is difficult to see how an ethics thus framed and originated 30 INSTITUTES OF THEOLOGY. could at all help to build up a theology, or could contribute any evidence for a God. Not so if virtue, instead of an originated product, is an original principle, in conformity to which, at the same time, a world has been so constructed and ordained that the greatest enjoyment of those who live m it would be the result of a general adherence to its lessons and its rules. We should say of the natural government of such a world, that it was a government of virtue. But as we could not rest in aught so imaginary and ideal as the government of a mere abstraction, we should pass from the abstract to the concrete, and find a residence for this virtue in some Being who realized upon His own character its perfection and its graces. In other words, let virtue be distinct from utility, yet ours be a world so constituted as that utility is the actual and the universal product of virtue — then, instead of stopping short at a generality or a name, we should find our way to a living God ; and from such a natural government of righteousness as this, would instantly conclude for at once a righteous and a reigning Governor. 12. But let us now descend to certain of the particular virtues, and notice more expressly the views of those specu- lators in ethical science who look on truth and justice as having no distinct or independent virtuousness of their own, but as being the mere offshoots or modifications of benevo- lence, their one great and all-pervading morality. Nothing can be more obvious than the vast and important subservi- ency both of truth and justice to the cause of usefulness, whereof in fact they are the direct and indispensable minis- ters in the converse and mutual transactions which take place between man and man in society. Yet it follows not that these are virtues, because of this subserviency alone ; or that to their beneficial influence on the affairs of the world, the whole of their moral rectitude or moral obliga- tion is owing. Certain it is that when men either fulfill a promise, or pay a debt, or deliver a conscientious testimony, they do so without any respect held by the mind to the usefulness of these observances, or any consideration of this element being at the time present with it. They, again, PRELIMINARY ETHICS. who would vindicate the analogies by which they resolve all the virtues into benevolence alone, tell us of the extrenae rapidity of our mental transitions — so rapid and so fugitive as to pass unnoticed, or with a celerity too evanescent for human consciousness. It might well be replied that this is a confession of a total want of positive evidence for their theory ; and that it seems a very insufficient basis for any doctrine, thus to ground it on an argumentum ah ignorantia. But without entering into the controversy any farther, it is enough for our purpose that we state the sides of it ; or that while the one party would claim for truth and justice and holiness an independent status as moral virtues, co-ordinate with, while distinct from the virtue of benevolence — the other party contend, that not only in the system of abstract ethics are they all reducible to benevolence alone, but that when lifting our contemplations to the character of Him who is supreme and eternal, though we speak of His various moral perfections as if they stood apart or had a substantive distinctness from each other, yet all are briefly compre- hended in this saying — that God is love. 13. Now we do not advance it as a full and definite solu- tion, because too well aware of the confusion and mischief which have ensued from making inroad by the proper views and principles of one science on the distinct territory of an- other ; yet we can see that at least one doctrine in the Christian theology, and that of weightiest importance among them all, might well serve to strengthen and confirm the advocates of the former opinion — we mean the doctrine of the atonement. In this great and solemn transaction, de- vised in heaven and consummated on earth, there seems a wondrous homage to the high claims and the immutable authority of that truth and that justice which stood in the way of a world's reconciliation ; and to provide for which in a manner consistent with these sacred attributes, was that mystery of the divine jurisprudence which angels de- sired to look into. The raising of such an apparatus, if we may so express it, as that of a redemption by sacrifice, and this in order to harmonize the overtures of mercv to our INSTITUTES OF THEOLOGY. guilty species, with the high prerogatives of that law which they had violated, speaks powerfully to our apprehension for the underived and original character of those great moral perfections which were exhibited and put forth by God in the high capacity of a Lawgiver — of that justice which both ordained and executes the law, and of that truth ■which stood committed to the enforcement of its penalties. If that system which affirms the separate and independent virtuousness of these high characteristics be entitled from the number and authority of its supporters to the appella- tion of the orthodox system of morals, then is it interesting here to observe so close a relationship of the two sciences, and how at this place of meeting between them, the ortho- dox ethics and the orthodox theology are at one.* 14. This example will make apparent, we hope, the soundness of our observation on the study of ethics as a useful preliminary to the study of theological science. While at the same time this latter science, this theology, rests and is mainly supported, not on the lessons of any previous science, but on a proper and independent evidence of its own. Who, for instance, should ever think of basing the doctrine of the atonement on any ethical category whatever ? — or of making it hinge on the determination of the question, whether truth and justice have in themselves an intrinsic or only a subordinate and derived virtuousness? Let this controversy be settled as it may, the previous truth of our atonement stands on the same unaltered and im- pregnable footing as before — even on the clear averments of a perfect revelation, having distinct and satisfying cre- dentials to authenticate the reality of its descent from the upper sanctuary. And yet it is well for the thoughtful in- quirer, that he should bring this great theological proposi- tion into contact and comparison with the dogmata of his prior school ; and that he should enjoy the reflex light and confirmation which it casts on his earlier and more element- * The harmony which subsists between the doctrine of an inclepeudent virtuousness in justice and truth, and the doctrine of the atonement,— Rom. iii. 26 ; Is. xlii. 21 ; Ps. Ixxxv. 10. PRELIMINARY ETHICS. 33 ary studies. It is interesting to remark that the meager theology which disowns an atonement and denies the need of one, chiefly prevails among the disciples of the utilitarian philosophy, or those who would resolve all the perfections of the Almighty into the single attribute of benevolence ; while, on the other hand, they who have been accustomed to view truth and justice as in themselves the objects of direct and ultimate recognition, if they carry this contem- plation upward to the throne of heaven, will regard Him- who sitteth thereon as the Sovereign as well as Parent of the human family. They will feel that not only is a tender- ness to be indulged, but an authority to be upheld and vindicated ; and should they contrast aright the sinfulness of man with the sacredness of God, will they prize the revealed doctrine of the atonement as they would the alone specific for a mortal and universal disease which had come upon the species — the best suited to the moral exigencies of our nature, and so the worthiest of all acceptation. 15. For our next example of a close and interesting ap- plication between the two sciences of ethics and theology, would we now select, not any controverted doctrine, but rather an aphorism or undoubted axiom of the former science. It might be announced with all the certainty of a first prin- ciple, that nothing is virtuous, or vicious either, which is not voluntary. Ere an act, or a disposition, or a mental state of whatever kind, can become susceptible of a moral desig- nation, can be rightly characterized either as morally good or morally evil, the will must have somehow had to do with it, either as an immediate or remote antecedent, which gave occasion or birth to the thing in question. This is a pro- position which requires no argument to carry it, for it must command the instant assent of every conscience. Whether it be a deed, or a desire, or a belief on which we are called to pass sentence, the choice must have had some part in it before it can come within the scope of a moral or judicial reckoning at all, or be properly the subject either of moral blame or moral approbation. In other words, we must be able to allege that a volition which should or should not have 34 INSTITUTES OF THEOLOGY. been put forth has had some concern in the matter, ere we can say of anything that either, on the one hand, this is its praise, or, on the other hand, that this is its condemnation. 16. Now, it may be thought, that this as being a truism rather than a truth, scarcely deserves the formahty of so express an introduction to the notice of the mind. Yet we have thus signahzed it, and that notwithstanding its extreme simplicity or obviousness ; for though plain in itself as the lesson of any school-boy, it, like other initial or elementary principles, teems with the weightiest and most important appHcations. For instance, it is by the help of this princi- ple, and we think in no other w^ay, that we establish the important position of a man's responsibility for his belief; and that we can point out wherein lies the criminality of wrong affections ; and that we can even vindicate the trans- cendental, or, as some would term it, the hard and revolt- ing dogma of predestination, from the aspersions cast upon it as at war with the moral sense of mankind, and subversive of all moral government. We do not say of ethical science alone, dealing as it does only with abstractions, that of itself it is competent to these achievements. But the ethical principle which we have just announced enters into and forms an essential part of these various demonstrations, to complete which, however, we must have recourse to the phenomena and laws of the mental physiology — a depart- ment on which we propose to set foot afterwards. Mean- while v^e think it right to single out for special notice and recollection that maxim in ethics by which the manifesta- tions now promised can in our view be abundantly made good ; and the theology of our evangelical system, in full accordance with all that is sacred in the academic philo- sophy, can be amply justified against the indignation and abuse that have been heaped upon it.* 17. There is still another lesson given forth by ethical writers wherewith it were well if the student of theology * That for any act or disposition to be susceptible of a moral designation, whether of blame or of approval, the will must have to do with it — John iii. 19 ; V. 40 ; ^ii. 17. PRELIMINARY ETHICS- 35 could make himself familiar, and carry forth to its right and legitimate bearings on the questions of his own science. We advert to the distinction made by them between the duties of perfect and imperfect obligation. That is a virtue of perfect obligation where, corresponding to the duty on one side, there is a counterpart right upon the other. Truth and justice are virtues of this class. If I make a promise to any man, it is not only my duty to fulfill the same, but, counterpart to this, I have invested him with a right to exact it of me. If I even but deliver a testimony in his hearing, it is my duty to be most scrupulously accurate ; and he, on the other hand, has a right upon my faithfulness. Should either of these turn out to be false then, unless from my want of power or knowledge I could not have helped it, has he a right to complain of an injury — in the first in- stance, that I have disappointed, in the second, have deceived him ; in the one case by raising in his mind a treacherous expectation, and in the other, a wrong belief. Then, pass- ing on from truth to justice, should I contract a bargain with another, it is not only my duty to make good its terms, but it is his right to demand the execution of them ; or should I owe him a debt, it is not only my duty to render, but it is his right to enforce the payment of it. These cases make quite clear what that is which constitutes a duty of perfect obligation ; and, on the other hand, w^e might exemplify in like manner those of the imperfect class — w'here there is a duty on the one side, but no corresponding right upon the other. It is my duty to forgive a wrong ; but it were a contradiction in terms to say of the culprit who had com- mitted the wrong, that he had a right to this forgiveness. It is my duty to give of my own to the necessitous around me ; but it were a like contradiction to speak of their right to this liberality — for whatever they have a right to, is not my own, is not mine, but theirs ; or, in other words, their right to a thing makes that thing their property, and in giving it to them "we fulfill not an act of liberality but of justice. Benevolence is an undoubted duty ; but it involves a paralogism to say of any man that he has a right to my benevolence, and pro- 36 INSTITUTES OF THEOLOGY. ceeds on the mistake of confounding two virtues which are essentially distinct from each other — the virtues of justice and humanity. Benevolence is my duty to him, but it is not therefore his right upon me ; and so, in terms of the usual definition given by moralists, benevolence, in its various mod- ifications and forms, is still a virtue of imperfect obligation. 18. The distinction, though it sounds somewhat scholas- tically, and has so far fallen into desuetude that many look upon it as exploded, is still an eminently practical one, and of capital importance in the business of legislation. Some of the greatest errors into which statesmen have fallen have arisen from the neglect of it. The proper object of law is to enforce the duties of perfect, but not those of imperfect obligation. It is to make sure for each man the undisturbed possession of his rights, which it does by repressing the in- fraction of them ; or what is tantamount to this, the great use and function of law in society is to protect the members of it from wrong. And thus it is that it has to deal prin- cipally and pre-eminently with questions of justice between man and man ; but never was a greater blunder committed than when, overstepping her own boundaries, law, not satis- fied with the enforcement of justice, aimed further at the enforcement of humanity. It does not lie within the province of human law to compel those duties on the part of one man, for which there is no correspondent right on the part of any other man. They may be morally binding ; but it is by an unwarrantable stretch beyond the limits of a rightful juris- prudence, if on that account singly they are made to be legally binding also. It is only with a part of virtue that human law has to do. There is a remainder on which it cannot intrude without serious injury both to the cause of morals and to the best interests of society. 19. But not so with divine law, which takes cognizance of all virtue, and claims ascendency over the whole man. Man, though he has right to the justice, has no right to th? benevolence of his fellow. But God has. He has full right to all our services, and in reference to Him the distinction ceases ; and the obligation not of one class of duties, but of PRELIiMINARY ETHICS. 37 all duty, is perfect and entire. And so He is alike peremp- tory in requiring benevolence, as in requiring truth or justice at our hands ; and with perfect reason too — for to every duty which can be named on the part of man, there is a corresponding right on the part of God. Man has no right upon us for any part of that which is our own. But in reference to God, we are not our own ; and that distinction which in the morals and jurisprudence of earth is of so much importance, and should never be lost sight of, is not so recognized, and not so proceeded on in the juris- prudence of heaven. Even under the system of natural theology, God has a full and perfect right upon us for those duties which are said to be of imperfect obligation ; and this more special right of His to our performance of the so-called imperfect duties, has a still more special and distinctive character of strength and prominency given to it in the Christian theology. Because Christ died for us we should live to Him : or, in other words, all our powers and affec- tions and virtues of any sort should be consecrated to His service. Because he laid down His life for us, we should lay down our lives for the brethren — a duty this to which, in the reckoning of an earthly morals, or under an economy of earthly law, there would be the most imperfect of all obligations. Because God so loved us, we ought also to love one another. Because God for Christ's sake hath for- given us, we should forbear and forgive one another : and so absolute is -the obligation of this latter duty, though per- haps in the system of natural ethics the most obviously im- perfect of any — that on our failure in the performance of it, we forfeit the blessings of our redemption. (Matt. vi. 15.) Nay, in the description of the final judgment, we find that upon benevolence are made to turn the rewards of an eter- nity ; and that which on the mere platform of human society would be the mere rendering of a gratuity to a neighbor rises from the imperfect to the perfect, when viewed in the light of a return for the kindness, or as if it were in pay- ment of a debt to the Saviour.* ** The distinction between the duties of perfect and imperfect obligation 38 INSTITUTES OF THEOLOGY. 20. Nay, so great is the pre-eminence given in the gospel of Jesus Christ to this benevolence, this virtue of imperfect obligation, that it is made to overshadow the others in a vray v^hich almost seems to supersede them, or to dispense with the necessity of making these the objects of our recognition at all. And accordingly we read of love being the fulfill- ment of all the law, and of all the other virtues, including both truth and justice, not that they are abrogated, but that they are briefly comprehended in this saying — Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. It is thus that the law of the gospel has been called the law of liberty — of which no bet- ter definition can be given than freedom to do as we like — so that if we like our neighbor, we shall be sure, and that not of constraint, but of our own spontaneous choice to work him no ill — a practical security, and that of the best sort, against any infraction of any of the virtues of perfect obligation. And thus it maybe thought of these virtues that they may forthwith disappear from the system of Christian ethics altogether — that charity absorbs all, because, itself a universal substitute, it comes in place of all ; and thus that the speculation of all the moralities being reducible to be- nevolence, which we have so recently ventured to denounce, will come to be realized and exem.plified in that state of per- fection which is contemplated by the apostle when he tells of the glorious liberty of the children of God. 21. Does it follow, then, that after charity or love has had ts perfect work in the heart, it so monopolizes the whole field of vision that a Christian, when thus far advanced, loses sight of truth and justice — so as that henceforth they disappear from observation, and resign that distinctive indi- viduality for which we have been contending, to the benev- olence which, in accordance with the tenet of those ethical philosophers against whom we have hitherto been listed, is now all in all? Our reply, on the contrary, is — that the moral virtues of truth and justice, and that too in their dis- tinctive peculiarity, continue the perpetual objects of recog- 18 the real ground and subsistence of the morahties which men owe to each other, but not of those which man owes to God. — 1 Cor. x. 31. PRELIMINARY ETHICS. 39 nition and reverence to the Christian disciple throughout all the stages of his spiritual advancement, and in this w^ay, it is quite true, that in virtue of the benevolence wherewith his heart is now charged, he will not be inclined to the violation of them, any more than the spirit of a just man made per- fect, and so filled with all moral excellence, is inclined to sin. But with the real perfection of a saint in heaven, or with an aspiring progress and tendency towards it on earth, there will be something more than disinclination to sin. There will be an abhorrence of sin — ^not a mere negative indifFer- ency, but a strong positive energetic recoil from the very conception of sin. It is this, in fact, which constitutes holi- ness— of which it were a wrong definition to say that it con- sisted in perfect virtue. This is not what holiness properly and precisely is. To have a right understanding of what that is, and nothing else, which we call holiness — we must look, not to virtue in itself, but to virtue in relation to its op- posite ; and the specific or essential characteristic of holi- ness lies in the repugnance, a repugnance which with the Godhead is infinite and invincible, that is felt to sin. Now, applying this to the present question, the mere fact of one or any number of Christians having had the law of love put into their hearts, cannot possibly affect the abstract system of ethics, which will remain in all its parts, and in all its diversities between one part and another, the same doctrine or body of propositions after this event as before it. More particularly, there would remain as wide a distinction be- tween justice and benevolence as ever, and no change what- ever in concrete persons could, in any conceivable way, lead to such a change of abstract principles as would merge these two into one and the same object of contemplation. Take two persons of great and nearly equal generosity, so near as that when tested it was found of the one that for the re- lief of the same case of distress he gave half a farthing more than the other. Take other two persons, each acquitting himself of the same contract ; and let it be found that while the first rigidly kept by the terms of his bargain, the second in the settlement of his, knowingly, deliberately, and by a "40 INSTITUTES OF THEOLOGY. dishonest artifice, contrived to secrete and appropriate for himself half a farthing which did not belong to him. Who would ever think of estimating these two differences on the same principles or in the same manner ? How comes it that while the material differences are precisely the same, the moral differences are so wholly unlike, and that not in degree but in species ? Why, it is because the virtues con- cerned in the two transactions are of different species. The defect of the one man's generosity from the other's is of no sensible estimation. The contrast between the one man's dishonesty and the other's faithfulness, is as distinctly mark- ed and as broadly discernible as is the contrast between light and darkness. In the first case, we are presented with gradations of the same color. In the second, we are pre- sented with the different hues of two opposite colors. It is all true that the same Christian love which prompted the generosity would also refrain from the injustice ; but if a Christian in all his parts, he would do more than simply re- frain from the injustice — he would recoil from it, and that with the clear and full and instant determination of one who had been well taught in the lesson, that " he who was un- faithful in the least was unfaithful also in much." Such mo- rality, the morality though it may seem of grains and scru- ples, is the highest toned morality of all — not that which takes alarm only at the grosser and more glaring enormities of human conduct, but that which would shrink from the minutest violations whether of truth or of justice. If to recoil from the first approaches of impurity or profaneness be the holiness of the sacred — then to recoil from the first approaches of falsehood or dishonesty, however venial they might appear to this every-day world, may well be termed the holiness of the social virtues — a holiness for which there is place and exercise even under the full reign of that char- ity which never faileth ; and accordingly heaven is at once the abode both of love and of holiness. And thus it is that the Christian servant told not to purloin, would spurn away every temptation to taste or to touch a forbidden thing ; and the Christian overseer would resolutely keep himself PRELIMINARY ETHICS. 41 from every unhallowed freedom with the property of his employer ; and the Christian merchant would disdain the paltry deception or concealment which might magnify his gains. There is nothing in the power or prevalence of Christian love to obliterate the virtues, or to banish from the society of earth the sacred and venerable forms, either of unswerving fidelity, or of high and untainted honor. And the same truth and justice which flourish here are trans- planted to the land of uprightness beyond the grave, and are there the themes of immortal celebration — " Just and true are thy ways, thou King of saints, thou only art holy." * 22. We have already intimated that there is a certain laxity of doctrine associated with the ethical speculation of those who would put truth and justice on the background, by making them a sort of secondaries or subordinates to the great master- virtue of benevolence. And we may further say of many in society, that, though not entertained as a theory, yet felt as a sentiment, it is in them associated with a certain laxity of practice. Free and fearless in expenditure, and with an openhandedness which passes for generosity, they can be profuse in hospitality, nay, even munificent in the exercise of compassion, when a tale of wretchedness is brought to their ears. Yet, just because there is more of impulse than of principle in all their well-doing, are they somewhat loose withal to the virtues of perfect obligation — not very punctual to their engagements — not very faithful to the days or the terms of stipulated payment — not over- scrupulous should there be any openings of escape from the tribute which is due by them — not very observant of the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, when hig- gling in markets, they would either unconscionably cheapen down the article they want to buy, or try to palm oflf on others the commodity in which they deal — in a word, with many of the frank and companionable virtues of good neigh- borhood, not very strict or literal in the discharge of those cardinal duties over against which there stand the counter- * Perfect holiuess is perfect virtue, but in a peculiar aspect, that of sep- aration and recoil from its opposite.— 1 Pet. i. 15, 16. "~ 42 INSTITUTES OF THEOLOGY. part rights of creditors or customers or employers. Theirs is what may be called the liberalism of virtue ; and it is x among them that splendid bankruptcies and splendid phoenix- ^ like revivals, and to account for these, we fear, splendid frauds, are often to be found. But this relaxation is not confined to such. It is met in every class of society ; nor are we aware of a fitter theme in all Christian ethics for the pulpit, and that to serve the purposes both of conviction and of direct moral tuition, than to denounce and to expose it. The minister when thus employed is standing up for what we have just styled the holiness of social virtue, when he tells the servants in a family not to purloin, and laborers in the field not to serve with eye-service, and men in the walks of merchandise not, in their love of money, which is the root of all evil, to forget the simplicity and godly sin- cerity of Christian disciples, even though their fellows should laugh at them as simpletons. And, in short, when he charges all and sundry of his hearers against those secret and un- seen but innumerable peccadilloes which are so currently practiced in the various departments of service, or house- keeping, or trade, or confidential agency, of far too various a character in the complicated relations of business and society for our enumeration.* 23. But a just sense of this ethical distinction may serve not only to enlighten and confirm our views of Christian practice — it should also rectify our apprehensions of Chris- tian doctrine. I should like you to ponder well the diflfer- ence between a legal right and a moral rightness, or which is the same thing, between a right in the substantive and rightness in the adjective sense of the term. The character of moral rightness is predicable of all virtue, but it is only a part of virtue to my performance of which any of my fel- lows in society can have a legal or judicial right. It is right for me to be benevolent, but no man can allege a right "to my benevolence as he can a right to my justice. It is right for me to forgive, but no man can allege a right to the * The magnitude of fidelity in littles when brought to a moral standard.— Gen. xiv. 23 ; Luke xvi. 10. PRELIMINARY ETHICS. 43 forgiveness of an injury, as he can to the payment of a debt. In short, it is right that I should acquit myself of all the virtues, even those of imperfect obligation ; but none on earth have a right upon me for any other virtues than those of perfect obligation, l^ow it is the equivoque of tv^^o terms so near in language, yet appHed to things so different in reality, w^hich has led to a certain sense of ambiguity in our understanding of certain passages, and so in our attempts to estimate aright certain doctrines of the 'New Testament; and it is only by attending to the distinction betv^^een a judicial right and a moral rightness that the ambiguity is resolved. The righteousness of which v^^e read there, as well as its counterpart 6iicaioavv7]'"m the Greek, is expressive sometimes of that righteousness which has acquired or made good a right to reward, and sometimes of that righteousness which, apart from the judicial element altogether, stamps a moral or personal worth upon the character. Now, in the former sense, the righteousness of man is uttei'ly held at naught under the Chi'istian dispensation ; and by its econ- nomy the most ruinous error into which man can fall is attempting to establish such a righteousness of his own — the very stumblingblock at which the Jews stumbled ; and a stumblingblock to the men of all generations who think, by their own obedience, to substantiate a legal claim to the divine favor, or to the preferments of a blissful eternity. But in the latter sense the righteousness of man is not only in highest demand ; but his restoration to entire personal virtue is announced to be the ultimate design of the Christian dispensation — the terminating object of which is that the man of God may be perfect and thoroughly furnished unto all good works. It is in virtue of the distinction now ex- plained, that we are enabled to resolve the seeming incon- sistency of these seemingly opposite representations. The righteousness of man is of no possible avail for the estab- lishment of his judicial right to a place in heaven ; and for this we must look exclusively and altogether to the right- eousness of Christ. But the righteousness of man is indis- pensable to his personal meetness for heaven ; and this can 44 INSTITUTES OF THEOLOGY. only be made good by his working mightily in the strength of that Spirit for whom he prays, and who works in him mightily. In other words, the righteousness of man con- tributes nothing to his justification. It is all in all for his sanctification ; and it is thus that passages and doctrines which some regard as destructive of each other admit of being fully harmonized.* * Righteousness is judicially understood when associated with the doctrine of justification, and morally understood when associated with sanctification. —Rom. X. 3, 4 ; Matt. v. 20. CHAPTER 11. PRELIMINARY METAPHYSICS AND MENTAL PHYSICS. 1. Metaphysics have been variously defined — as first, the science of the principles and causes of all things exist- ing. We conceive Lord Monboddo's description of this science, and v^^hich might be accepted for a definition of it, is still more comprehensive — that its province is to consider that ra ovra t] ovra existences only as existences. It looks to all the things which be, but not in their special properties by which each is distinguished from all others ; for on de- scending to these, we touch on some of the secondary or subordinate sciences. It looks to them in their common property of existence, and considers what is involved in the one universal attribute " to be." Our reason for saying of, this view that it is more comprehensive than the first one, is, that it includes properties and relations as well as prin- ciples and causes. For example, we might affirm, or at least discuss the question, whether all existent things, in virtue of existence alone, have not a relation to, or do not exist both in space and time, neither of which, let them be viewed either as substantive elements in themselves, or as mere elements of thought, can be regarded as the principle or cause of anything existing. Still metaphysics, so far as yet described, may be reckoned as but the science of entity; and as such it were exclusive of certain topics which never can be discussed without being viewed as metaphysical. For example, neither mathematics nor ethics, when treated abstractly, have to do with things concrete — the one being the science of quantity, and the other, alike without the limits of ontology, whose category is the quid est, being the science of deontology, whose altogether distinct category is the quid oportet. The mathematical relations of the first science, and the moral relations of the second, have an in- 46 IxNSTITUTES OF THEOLOGY. dependent truth in themselves, although there were no existent being in the universe to substantiate or exemplify either of them. The propositions of mathematical science depend not for their truth on the existence of matter; and the propositions of moral science depend not for their truth on the existence of mind — though ere, perhaps, we could conceive of them, both matter and mind must be thought of or have a hypothetical existence given to them. And yet we could not affirm thus of these two sciences without being charged with speaking metaphysically. They also, therefore, must have to do with metaphysics ; and, indeed, it is currently held of every science that it has a metaphysics, whether it lie within or beyond the province of ontology. We should therefore regard it as a better adjustment, a more convenient distribution of the objects of human thought, if we should adopt, as the strict definition of metaphysics, what it is often called — not the first philosophy, for besides not being in all respects true, this would not serve the pur- poses of a definition so well as another ascription which has been given to it — the science of sciences. We confess our preference for such a definition to any of the former ones. Each science sits as arbiter on its own proper objects — its office being to ascertain and to record the specific charac- ters of every distinct individual, as well as the similarities and differences which obtain amongst them. Now the proper objects of the metaphysical science are distinct from the objects of any or of all the others ; for, in truth, the proper objects of metaphysics are the sciences themselves. It, as being the scientia scientiarum, sits as arbiter over all the sciences ; and its office is to assign the peculiarities by which each differs from the rest, and the generalities in which two or more of them agree — rising to higher and higher generalizations in proportion to the number of sciences which are under survey and comparison at the time. Should we ever be able to arrive at the one generalization which belongs to them all, we shall then have reached the loftiest possible abstraction, the point or summit of highest trans- cendentalism. PRELIMINARY METAPHYSICS. 47 2. According to this view of metaphysics, it stands re- lated to all the sciences in the way that each particular science is related to all the individual objects wherev/ith it is conversant. To divest the mind of all philosophy even to its first beginnings, or in its earliest rudiments, one would need to be so constructed as to be capable of knowing ail the things within his sphere of observation only as individ- als ; and we are not sure if idiots or the inferior animals can attain to more. Should ten objects have the same property, or ten events fall out by the same process, then, from the moment that one takes cognizance of this sameness, he enters on the work of philosophy, the proper business of which is to form individuals into classes, by grouping them according to their resemblances. The man who can tell me of ten different things, whether he be a peasant or an academician, that they are all of a white color, or all pos- sess the common property of whiteness, is pro tanto a phi- losopher. And thus it is, that throughout the popular mind, and in the business of human society, there is in current and familiar exercise an essential philosophy, though it be not so named. The only difference between the philosophy of common sense and the philosophy w^hich men have agreed to call such, is, that the latter has to do with larger generalizations, and more especially, if to extend the gen- eralization, much labor has to be bestowed. All men are aware of a very general resemblance amongst falling bodies at the surface of the earth ; and in having thus generalized, they acted the real part of philosophers, although they are not styled such ; but when Sir Isaac Newton extended this generalization, and made palpable the likeness between a body falling towards the center of the earth, and the moon deflecting towards it in its orbit, this was honored as a high achievement in philosophy; and he became the very prince of philosophers on the discovery of a still wider generaliza- tion, even that all matter gravitates towards all matter. This law of gravitation is a very general fact, far more general than that all bodies at the earth's surface are pos- sessed of weight, so that if left without support, they will 4S I!