fully acknowledged and defined in the following work, embraces and emphasizes on its positive side an impor- tant truth. The power, and hence the danger, of the heresy resides in that fact. But on the other hand, it is a heresy, and hence an evil to be resisted unto death, because it either: puts a subordinate principle into the place of that which is central and fundamental, or be- cause it puts one side of the truth for the whole, denying or ignoring all besides the fractional truth presented. It is plainly the policy as well as the duty of the defenders of the whole truth, not only to acknowledge the truth held on the side of their opponents, but to vindicate the rights of the perfect system as a whole, by demonstrating the true position and relation of the partial truth ad- mitted in the larger system of truth denied. By these means we double the defences of orthodoxy, by bringing into contribution all that is true, and therefore all that is of force, in the apologies of error.
2. The second point is, that systems of divinity and definite views of doctrine are not a matter of choice, but of absolute necessity to the Church, as long as the Bible is read with interest. This unquestionable necessity arises from the logical constitution of the human mind to which the Christian revelation has been addressed, and from the self-consistent reason of that infinite mind from which the revelation has origimated. That all
truth is one in God and in man is an invincible axiom.
The man who intelligently denies this, is ripe for atheism. The human mind—that of the individual and that of every community—ever strives to introduce unity into the whole mass of its knowledge. God’s plans, purposes, administrations—whether through nature or from above nature; and his revelations—whether history or prophecy, whether doctrine, precept, or promise, must all constitute one system ; and hence, all their parts must sustain a con-
INTRODUCTORY. 19
sistent relation to one another. They cannot be conceived of truly unless they are conceived of as they are, each being accurately defined, and all understood in their mutual relations.
At present there are two absurdly inconsistent attacks, origimating in rationalistic sourees, directed against that system of trath which the Christian Church has dis- cerned in the inspired Scriptures. The first attack is made upon the plea that everything contamed in a supernatural revelation—bemg a part of a great self- contained system of truth—must be forthwith explained and set forth, in all its relations, in the light of the human reason, Some arguing from analogy, and others appealing to their own elementary intuitions and feelings, determine @ priori what God can do and say, and therefore what God does do and say; thus using the materials of revelation in subordination to the law-giving power of reason. The whole class of errorists with whom we have to do draw their doctrine in the first instance from rational principles, and they appeal to Scripture only to show that it may be quoted in at least apparent conformity with what has been previously dis- covered and proved on other grounds. The second attack appears in the form of a protest against definite views of doctrine, and covers its real denial of the fun- damental articles of the Christian faith under vague generalities. Coleridge, in his Aids to Reflection,* denies that the Scriptures reveal anything to us of “ the efficient cause and condition of redemption,” except the bare fact that Christ has achieved it; and affirms that all that is revealed to us concerns the “effects of redemption in and for the redeemed” themselves. Hence a large class of theologians in England, and a smaller but grow- ing one in America, are continually pleading for the bare
* Aphorisms on Spiritual Religion Indeed: Comment on Aphorism 19.
CHAPTER I.
CHAPTER I.
20 THE NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT.
implicit recognition of the Atonement as a fact, and pro- testing against all theories of the Atonement whatsoever ; that is, against all definite views upon the subject.*