Farewell to the First Congregational Church in Norwalk, Conn. (bound with other addresses)

[P. 251.] "And so, when we speak of propitiating God, the subjective im- pressions and dispositions wrought in the sacrificer, or the disciple, are them- selves the ground or condition of peace and divine manifestations in the soul, otherwise not yielded. God is really become propitious, only not by effects wrought in himself, but in his worshiper. Nor is it any mere fiction, when God is thus said to be prevailed with or propitiated, but a most real truth ; for it serves the real and true uses of the mind." [P. 334.] " For not even truth is a valid interest, apart from salvation, or the uses of the soul." [P. 248.] "The most impotent, unreal, and inefficacious of all forms of thought, are commonly the subjective." [P. 252-3.] " Besides, there is an immense practical advantage, in the ob- jective form, as you may easily discover. For, suppose it were required of us to speak, not of prevailing with God in prayer, lecavse that is a fiction, but of irevailing rather with ourselves. The suppliant coming now before God, with lis mind introverted, and having it as the form of his thought to prevail tvith himself, that is, to draw himself into the very states of desire, dependence, pu- rity, and love, which God meant to secure by the ordinance of prayer, — occu- pied in this mere subjective way, he will, for that reason, accomplish nothing ; unless it be to annihilate aU simplicity in his ffeeling, turn his prayers into re- flective and self-culturing efforts, and blend so many artificial thoughts with his hi 48 while no such propitiation is either necessary or possible, [see 243-5, 271, 259, 288-9 under Sec. l.j He is by this belief and endeavor best assisted to come into the subjective state of re- conciliation ; which can in no way be effected so well as by the endeavor to propitiate God. " What • further proof is needed of the solid and practical verity of such a form of thought ?" [253.] So with regard to Christ as a propitiation ; though absurd, even the simplest form of absurdity, and indi- cative in God (if it were true), of the confusion or loss of all moral distinctions, [see 271 ;] there is still a most solid reality in it when taken objectively by faith as though it were true, 253a.] And here precisely is the truly Divine Aet of the exercise, that he will scarcely know whether he prays or not. And so, if we insist that no man shall pray as if to prevail with God, but only as if to prevail with himself, prayer will sink, at once, into the worst ahertion and poorest lie conceivable. The form of thougliti in the exercise, must be outward, the draft of the mind must be objectiTe — toward God, to prevail with God, simple, unrejlec- tive, inartificial, — and then the soul of the suppliant will itself be harnessed into that precise state &f want; love, and devotion which is requisite, and is, tnfact, the real matter to be prevailed in. What, then, do we conclude, but that, speak- ing of prevailing with God," holding that objeotif e form of thought, is accepting no fiction' or unreality, but the most real and solid rather of all representations, because it is the only one that serves the real and true uses of the soul. , [P.' 253.] " Just so must we look upon the propitiatory offering of the He- brew worshiper. He comes to propitiate God, and that exactly, is the form of thought that will best assist him in coming into the subjective state of reconcili- ation which is necessary,, to find God propitious and to be established in peace with him. Which being true, this form of thought is no unreality or fiction; for it is that alone, by or through which the man will come into the state of peace with God which he is after. Since the subjective change of reconciliatian to God can no way be effected so well as to have the worshiper, in his offering, trying, in humble sorrow and contrition, to propitiate God, what farther proof is needed of the solid and practical verity of such a form of thought ? ETcn though God is not to be propitiated by a change in himself, the form of thought, taken as a type of action for the soul, is still more true than any other ; just as it is more true to say that the 'sun rises,' when it does not, than to say 'we are roUed up into the view of the sun,' because it better meets the practical uses of life." [P. 257.] "The Hebrew worshipper comes to expiate, or atone, or make amends for his sins." [P. 25Y.] " Yes, but there must be some fight meaning in my transaction whether I can understand it or not, and, as God requires it, I wiU do as he com- mands." [P. 253.] " 77ie sanne is to be said when speaking of Christ as a propitiation for sin, and of all the kindred forms and figures of the altar. If the matter is to reconcile us or renew us in love, and not tOTeconcile God by a change in him, still there is a most solid reality in these altar forms. Taken as objective to faith; they set us in just that attitude in which the reconciling power of Christ will be most efficacious ; just ns we pray most effectually, when our thought is to prevail with God, and not when we think only of prevailing with om'solves.'* 49 Gospel plan, [254.] The Unitarian cannot believe it ; and thougli he holds the truth concerning Christ's errand and work, yet as he dismisses the objective form, which is an untruth, he has nothing but tbe truth to help him, and nothing left him for a Gospel but to fall to being reconciled to God, or projpi- tiated subjectively toward him ; which, though according to the truth in the case, [see 253 and 245,] " is about the same kind of operation as regards success, that it would be if one were to think in prayer only of prevailing with himself^ [254 ;] which we have seen to be the same as to fall into the worst, abortion and poorest lie conceivable, [see 252.] The Ortho- dox believe the form to correspond to the reality; (i. e., they: believe that to be true which God has declared concerning it, and which he has called upon us to believe, see 241,) they build it up into what they call a scheme of atonement, when, (though believed precisely as Gbd requires them to believe, see 241), it becomes like the Ptolemaic system, of course untrue. " AH the life-giving subjectivities of the altar are every one emp- tied of their value ; and then ceasing to be a symbol for the support of faith and a contrite spirit, they become instead, not seldom, a stumbling block to reason and a hindrance even to the peace of the soul," [254-5.] [P. 253(1.] " The same is to he saidwhen speaking of Christ as a propitiation for sin, and of all tlie kindred forms and figures of the altar. If the njatter is. to . reconcile us or renew us, in love, aijd not to, reconcile God by a change in him, still there is a most solid reality in these altar forms. Taken as objective to faith, they set ua in just that attitude in which the reconciling power of Christ will be' most efficacious ; just as we pray most etfesetiially when our thought is to pre- vail with God, and not when we think only of prevailing with ourselves." [P. 284.1 "And here, precisely, is the truly Divine art of the Gospel plan." [P. 245.] " The reality of the propitiation consists in the fact that, he is brought into a real and true peace with God." [P. 254.] "And here, precisely, is the truly Divine art of the Gospel plan. The Unitarian can not believe it Christ, he affirms, most trul^, has come to . reconcile us to, God. Then he concludes, most falsely, that propitiation and all such Jewish figures as speak of reconciling God to us, only, obscure the truth. Let them be dismissed. And now there is nothing left him for a Gospel, hut to fall to being reconciled, to God, or propitiated isyijefitioely toward him, which is about the same kind of operation, as regards success, that it would be if one were to think only in prayer of prevailing with himself r [P. 254-6. J " Meantime, the speculative Orthodox, thqse I mean who really hold or think they hold the first and second of the four views al)ove stated, tak e up the objective forms of the altar, and begin to theorize upon them and ,, build hem into virliat they call a scheme of atonement. Just as one might take 4 50 REMARKS. 41M 1. Dr. B. says, [p. 284,} that lie feels " bound to say, yet more emphatically than before, that this whole scheme of suf- fering in Christ, substituted directly for penal suffering in us, is a bare assumption, justified by no Scripture authority what- ever." Yet even Dr. B. declares, and declares truly, that God in the Scriptures offers us the matter of Christ's life and death under that form, and calls upon us to believe it as the truth, [241 ;] that " he calls the death of Christ a saorifice^ an offer- iftg, a propitiation j declares the remission of sins in his blood/ represents him as bearing the sin of mankind in a way ofvi- carious substitution / calls him the Lamb of God that taketh away the sins of the world ; and then he invites us to come and QxevQiSQ faith in him as being all these, and so a complete salvation." Now if God himself so represents Christ as all this in the Scriptures, and calls upon us " to receive him in faith as being all this," then is it so that " the whole scheme of suffering in Christ substituted for penal suffering in us, is a bare as- sumption, justified by no Scripture authority whatever ?" Can there be more complete or indubitable Scripture authority for up the expression, 'the sun rises,' and work it logically out into a Ptolemaic system of astronomy (when of course it becomes untrue), so it is shown to the school, by the most certain logic, hovi God, as the governor of the world, could not let go the just penalties of sin without being propitiated, first, by some eflFcct wrought in himself. All the grand, life-giving objectivities of the altar undergo a like theological transformation, every one to he emptied of its value ; and tlien, ceas- ing to he a symbol for the support of faith and a contrite spirit, to become instead, not seldom, a stumbling blocK to reason and a hindrance even to the peace of the soul." For further proof se6 the passages cited, and the remarks on this topic, pp. 23 — 27, of our Remonstrance and Complaint, showing that "the objective form, if regarded as the truth, is not true ; the representation bearing no true corres- pondency to any thing real ;" and that Dr. B. teaches, in his first book, that "God prepares a Divine for^n — a form not corresponding to the reality of things, and which is not true — ^by wliich, through an illusion, not to say deception, practiced on the understanding of men, he moves their feelings to love and righteousness ;" and that , " this illusion is far more efi'ectual than truth ;" so that men are converted by holding with "faith to an untruth." For further illustration and proofs, see our Remonstrance, pp. 23 — 27, Sec. 7 ; Objective fokms of subjective tkuths, Sec. 8 ; CaEisTiAKrrr, esoiebio and exoter- ic, with Remarks, pp. 26-7. 51