4. The common view characteristic of the New Eng- land Theology was generated by an attempt to re-adjust the positions of old Calvinism in view of the rationalistic attacks made upon it by John Taylor of Norwich, and the Socinians of America. This view was introduced by Dr. Samuel Hopkins, and developed by Edwards, Dwight, Emmons, &c., and has hence passed into gene- ral currency among all the adherents of that form of modified Calvinism called New England Theology. They found it necessary to protest, in the interest of Rational- ism, against the principle that the descendants of Adam should have been judicially held to have justly forfeited all their rights as new-created moral agents, simply be- cause of the sinful act of their progenitor, performed ages before their own existence. They therefore deny that human beings come into the world subject to any antenatal forfeiture, or with any positive moral corrup- tion of nature. In the place of these discarded positions of old Orthodoxy, they explain the facts by saying that the human race exists under a sovereign constitution of God, which has provided that, upon the condition of Adam’s sin in the garden, every one of his descendants shall infallibly sin as soon as he enters upon moral agency. Thus they ground the whole procedure ulti- _ mately upon the sovereignty instead of upon the justice of God. In answer to the question wHy this great evil is inflicted upon creatures just commencing their exist- ence, they refer us simply to the sovereign good pleasure of God. In answer to the question How the uniform origination of sin is determined in the first responsible
CHAPTER VII.
New Eng-
land
“Rootam
Theory.”
\ f sy
H
CHAPTER VIi.
Doctrine _ of Pla- czeus.
84 THE NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT.
act of the recent creatures of a holy God, some of them content themselves with referring to an inscrutable divine constitution which secures that result; while others re- solve the matter into the natural physiological laws of generation, whereby the parent begets an offspring morally, as well as intellectually and physically, lke himself; and others again, as eminently Dr. Emmons, refer the result to a “stated mode of divine efficiency,” whereby God, upon the antecedent condition of Adam’s sin, proceeds to create a series of sinful acts through the agency of each of his descendants. This last view, which refers all human action to a direct divine efficient precursus, is virtual Pantheism, and evidently makes God the author of all sin. On this side of divine effi- ciency Emmons developed the New England Theology to death. Since his time all the advocates of that system refer the origin of sin in men to their natural descent from Adam, the organic root and natural head of all mankind; so that inherited corruption, instead of being viewed as a penal consequent of Adam’s sin, is regarded simply as a natural consequent of it, transmitted, like the nose upon the face, by the natural and universal laws of animal reproduction.
This so-called “improvement” of New England Theo- logy is in principle identical with the doctrine broached by Joshua Placzeus, Professor in the Theological Semi- nary of Saumur, France (cvrcum 1640). He maintained that Adam’s first sin, whereby he apostatized, being his own personal act, could not be imputed to any of his descendants ; because, since it was not their act, they were not responsible for it, and therefore could not justly be punished for it. But since Adam’s apostasy neces- sarily corrupted his own nature, and since, by ordinary generation, the corruption of his nature determined the corruption of all those who were descended from him, it
: q +3
FEDERAL HEADSHIP OF ADAM. 85
follows hence (1.) That all descending from him by ordi- cmrrmr nary generation begin to sin as soon as they begin to act Bi sd as moral agents, and (2.) That they are justly condemned and punished for their own sinful acts which thence result.