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

But what depths are Ipwer than to deny the doctrine of the atonement, as " insignificant" — " the simplest form of absurdity !" casting on God a " double ignominy," indipating in Him the '• loss or confusion of all moral distinctions," and rendering the Lord unworthy to be God of our love and worship ! and yet to declare that God sets forth the Gospel under this form of a vicarious atonement, and calls nppn us so to believe it in simple faith 1 What depth is lower than this ? What development of the mystery of iniquity are we to look for worse than this ? From what abyss below this has he, who holds such a doctrine ascended, that he has arrived at such a ppint as this in his upward progress 1 What is lower ? Alas, this tenderness towards error, and this indiffprence toward the truth ! This effort to shield the offender in the very act of piercing the Savior, and that in the house of his friends ! This indifference it is, after all, that constitutes the most alarming feature of the times. With- out this, assaults upon our faith would be like the waves of the ocean that dash upon the mountain rock — broken, scattered into foam and spray, and driven away by the wind. But now there comes another, with a theory that shall hnsh nearly all controversies, and build a safe and commodious bridge over the impas- sable gulf which separates between orthodoxy and the more reputable forms of error. He has invented a distinction between " the theohgy of the intellect and the theology of feeling.'" If this means simply that figurative Ifl.nguage is not to receive a literal interpretation, and that poetry is not to be confounded with prose, then it is but giving a very inappropriate and pompous title to a very old and very simple thing ; and entering upon a most elaborate disquisition and argument to prove what nobody has ever doubted. But this is not all that the inventor intended ; for he denies expressly that the theology of 16 the feelings " can be termed mere poetry." He declares that " it is no play, but solemn earnestness." — " Neither can its words be called merely figurative," but are " forms of language which circumscribe a substance of doctrine ;" so that " this form of doctrine is far from being fitly represented by the term imaginative." Be it so. Then the invention has an application wider, perhaps, than the inventor was at first aware of. Here is a hard doctrine, which the carnal mind hates, and which the unsanctified reason abhors. But it is in the catechism ; it is in the creed. It will not do to reject it ; and yet he who desires to be at peace with both catechism and creed, cannot by any means receive it as true. What shall he do 1 In times of olden simplicity a man would have had no other resource than to reject a plain, prosaic statement of the creed, if he did not believe it. But here is an invention which obviates that difficulty. Here is a doctrine. Do you receive it as true ? No, I regard it as " the simplest form of absurdity," How can I believe what I regard as untrue ? Oh, it is indeed untrue, if you refer it to the theology of the intellect. But refer it to the theology of the feelings. Eeceive it, not as truth,\i\it as true material for feeling ; " emotive theology ;" and say no more about it. What doctrine of the catechism or creed need cause any one " the least consciousness of op- pression or constraint," on this principle ? But some one will say, this is a use which the inventor never intended. I answer that he has himself indicated this use, when he has represented the soul as " quick to seize at a truth as held up in one way, and spurn at it as held up in another," as " marvellous in its tact for decomposing its honest belief, disowning with the intellect what it embraces with the actions." I answer, further, that it is the use which he has made of it. He has taken the sober, prosaic doctrines of the creed and catechism concerning the imputation of Adam's guilt and Christ's righteousness, and removed them from the theology of the intellect, as out of place in that category of truth. I answer, further, that he has indicated this use to be made of the theology of the feeling, by making feeling the test of truth ; affirming that when the words of any doctrine " make an abiding impression that the divine government is harsh, pitiless, insincere, oppressive, devoid of sympathy with our most refined sentiments, recMess even of the most delicate emotion of the tenderest nature, then we may' infer 17 that we have left out of our theology some element which we should have inserted, or have brought into it some element which we should have dis- carded.'''' And have we not men making high pretensions to piety, who, on this ground of repugnance to their feelings, reject the doctrine of a vicarious atonement 1 Are not the doctrines of the fall, of election and reproba-' tion, and of eternal punishment, " harsh, pitiless, insiacere, oppressive," in view of all Socinians and Universalists ? But are they therefore untrue ? If a man may avow his belief in the catechasca and creed, and then be at liberty to deny its doctrines in the sense which the framers of the creed and catechism intended to convey ; if he is at liberty to remove those doctrines from one theology to the other; to' accommodate his belief or unbelief, his philosophy or his fancy, then how are we to determine, when a man owns the catechism or creed, what he believes, or what he does not believe ? Under such a use, what is this new distinction, but a device for enabling all men to receive all creeds ; every man deciding for himself what in the creed is true, and referring that to the intellect ; and referring to the theology of the feelings all that he would reject as untrue ; so that, salva fide and salva conscientia, he may freely accept " as many creeds as are offered him V Admirable expedient for har- monizing all differences, believing all creeds, and transmuting all here- sies into orthodoxy ! Admirable invention ! save that, like many other pieces of theoretic machinery, it has to encounter, in practice, some troublesome amount of uncalculated friction ; and that is, the utter im- possibility that any man should believe in his heart any thing that his intellect rejects as untrue. The " tearful German," who said, " In my heart I am a Christian, while in my head I am a philosopher" (infidel), • was an infidel, nevertheless. But we have lingered too long in these dreary wastes. Let us come where we can breathe purer air, and tread on firmer ground ; to contem- plate truth in its holiness and beauty as we find it in the pages of God's Sacred Word. Here let us observe : ]. That God is a God of truth. Whoever transgresses against truth, sins against the Lord. Nor is this simply on account of the utility of truth, but because truth is a part of the Divine Holiness, and of the . 18 holiness ■which He requires in angels and men. Were truth to be re- garded merely for its utility, then there might he balancings between the profit and loss of truth or falsehood ; and virtue or vice would lie in either, or shift from side to side, according to the adjustment of the mer- cantile Taalance-sheet. But now truth is unchangeable and sacred. It is vain to plead that the falsehood concerns a matter of small moment ; that it resulted in little or no harm ; or that it was the means of avoiding much evil, or of securing much good. " All liars shall have their part in the lake •which burneth with fire and brimstone." 2. Eevealed truth reposes in the sacredness which pertains to its Author. Injuries committed against it, partake of the guilt of outrage against the Majesty t>i the Lord. Pervert that truth ; corrupt it ; hold it in unrighteousness ! — scarcely can any crime be more horrible. " I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, if any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him, the plagues that are written in this book. And if any man shall take away from the words of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life." 3. When truth concerns the conduct of life, or any valuable interest of life, then it is of great practical importance ; and error leads, necessa- rily, to loss or ruin. The traveller may be sincere and confident while he pursues the wrong path, but sincerity and confidence only render him the more liable to fall into some pit, or to plunge from the brink of some fearful precipice. If the mariner trusts to an erring compass, the more implicitly he trusts the surer his destruction. The merchant bases important operations upon false intelligence, and is ruined. The phy- sician believes some erroneous theory, and disease and death multiplying around him, soon convince him that all creeds are not alike profitable and safe. The lawyer mistakes a principle, and ruin falls upon his client. The statesman commits an error in political economy, and de- cay and ruin come upon manufactures and commerce. Where is not error, in its nature, destructive ? In agriculture, in mechanics, a false theory or ignorance shall bring embarrassment or ruin. How much more important is the truth when the salvation of the soul is at stake ! If error leads to ruin here, how great is that ruin ! And it does lead to ruin. " If the blind lead the blind, both fall into 19 the ditch." " There is a way that seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death." How many grope in darkness, and never behold the light ! How many run to false refuges ! How many build upon an unsafe foundation ! How many who have " fol- lowed after- the law of righteousness, have not attained to the law of righteousness," " because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law "!