1842.] Importance of Liberal Culture in the Minister. 9 of the religion he professes to teach, its character and fortunes in past ages, the phases it has assumed, the effects it has wrought on society, and the modifications it has itself received from the progress of intellect and the agency of human passions, must be felt to be a defect. It is discreditable to him. It involves, to say the least, a sort of indecorum. It does not, to use the old phraseology, harmonize with our idea of the nature and fitness of things; with our abstract conception of what a minister should be. But to descend from this position, which may be thought to savor a little too much of idealism for the present day, and to be seeking a footing in the clouds, (though such notions were current when I was young,) there are, if I mistake not, indirect, but substantial and positive benefits, which the minister will derive from the study of Christian history. An acquaintance with a few traditionary dogmas and a little sectarian divinity have been all, which have frequently, heretofore, until within a short period, been thought essential to the education of a preacher; I do not say universally, for there have been honorable exceptions. For some time past more liberal ideas have been gaining ground; but there is still room for advance. The character of the times, and the condition of knowledge and progress of intellect in other departments of human inquiry, and the direction which speculative minds are taking, are certainly such as require attention to the state of theological science, and should keep the mind alive to the importance of historical research. There are demands of the age which must be met, questions of deep import, some notice of which must be taken, which it will not do always to pass over in silent contempt, and a reply to which requires us to go back to the first elements of belief and knowledge in the human soul, to obviate objections and put an end to doubt. But independently of all considerations of this sort, and of all questions relating to the historical basis of Christianity, and its defence, the minister has no lack of motives to the study of the history of his religion. It is a history intrinsically important; so far as the subject, the development of man's spiritual nature, during a period which has witnessed the extinction of ancient civilization, and the reorganization of society in modern times, is concerned, the noblest of all histories. And putting the study of it on the basis of a comprehensive utility merely, it has strong claims on his attention. ́A knowlVOL. XXXIII. -3D S. VOL. XV. NO. I. - 2 edge of it may not tell immediately, but it will tell in the course of a life of ordinary length. Occasions will occur on which its uses will be manifest. The minister must contend for the simplicity that is in Christ. He must preach the pure truths uttered by the founder of his religion. He must endeavor to form a just conception of these truths; he must separate them from human additions; he must labor to disengage them from the mass of error, by which they have been overshadowed and darkened in past ages. In doing this he must become a reformer. He must remould the Christianity of his day, and bring it back to its original pure elements, and thus in some measure take the attitude of a controvertist. He must combat false doctrines grown venerable by age. He must lay his hand, gently but firmly, on time-hallowed associations, and expose abuses sanctioned by prescription, and the authority of some as great names as have ever adorned humanity. This is the least pleasant part of his duty, but it is sometimes necessary. In performing this task he will be compelled to make use of the lights of Ecclesiastical History, that part of it particularly denominated in modern times the history of dogmatic theology, or history of the doctrines of Christianity. He must trace the origin and progress of the corruptions, under which the simple truths of the gospel have been buried and well nigh extinguished. He must point out their source in human weakness, ambition, and selfishness, in superstition and false philosophy, in the modes of thinking foreign from the principles of the religion of the humble Nazarene, which the converts from paganism, from time to time, took along with them in passing over to Christianity, and unconsciously blended with the new faith; for they could not be expected at once to emancipate themselves from all their former modes of thought, and all the philosophical notions in which they had been educated. Such a result was not possible. The advocate for the simple truths of the Gospel will find it indispensable sometimes to adopt this method, in order to meet the objections of his adversaries, for error is ever fond of intrenching itself behind the defences of antiquity, and the general belief of the human mind. To illustrate what I mean by an example, the Trinitarian asserts that his faith is old, that it was from the beginning, that it has always been the faith of Christians, and this fact, he argues, affords a strong presump tion that it was taught by Jesus and his Apostles; for how else, he asks, can we account for its early and extensive prevalence? Now this objection is certainly entitled to a reply, and the answer must be sought in history. From this it is to be shown that, appearances to the contrary notwithstanding, the doctrine formed no part of the belief of the primitive church; that it is clearly to be referred to the learned converts from heathenism; that the first distinct traces of it, found in any Christian writing of acknowledged antiquity and genuineness, appear in the Dialogue and Apologies of Justin Martyr, the earliest of those converts of whom we have any remains; that it had its origin in that confused mixture of the philosophy and traditions of nearly all nations, which, united with a spirit of allegorizing, and strongly tinctured with oriental mysticism, was taught in the schools of the Alexandrine Platonists in the second and third centuries, and with them passed into the Christian Church, where it received from time to time various modifications and additions, till it assumed the form, very nearly, which it has since retained. I am stating nothing which is not familiar to you. I take this instance simply as illustrating one of the uses to which a knowledge of Ecclesiastical History may be appropriated. It assists us to explain other errors which have cast a dark shade over the religion of the Son of Mary. Thus we trace the doctrines of modern Calvinism back to the stern old African, the bishop of Hippo, who found the germs of them in Manicheism, of which he was for some years a disciple, before he became an orthodox Christian, and of which he always seems to have retained a certain taint. The argument against Popery which proves most embarrassing to its supporters, if I may be pardoned an allusion to the subject here, is the historical one, because Popery ensconces itself in what it considers as the strong hold of tradition. The Oxford controversy is but a form of the Popish, and the combatants use weapons drawn from the armory of ancient Christian history. This controversy does not disturb us, in this vicinity, but there are parts of our country in which its influence is sensibly felt. It has rendered arrogant pretensions more arrogant; it has relighted a spirit of bigotry, and emboldened intolerance and exclusivenees. A writer in a recent number of one of our Literary Quarterlies, circulated somewhat extensively, I believe, and enjoy ing some reputation, I allude to the New York Review,* expressly, and in so many words, condemns the right (" fancied" right he calls it) of private judgment and religious freedom, pronounces the principle of the Congregationalists "arrogant dogma," and contends strongly for the necessity of an authoritative church, and an authoritative interpreter of Scripture. These views connect themselves with the claims of Prelacy and the doctrine of apostolical succession, which have been of late urged with such frequency and obtrusiveness in portions of our country, from the pulpit, and in the leading Episcopal Journals, several of which are pledged to the support of the doctrines of the Oxford divines, that it has been found necessary to take the field, and already a goodly sized octavo, manifesting no little industry and research, has appeared, printed in this city, though written by a Presbyterian of the South, in refutation of these, as we are accustomed to consider, perfectly absurd and obsolete claims. The whole constitutes a phenomenon of little importance in itself, but yet, as Carlyle would say, noteworthy in this our nineteenth century, and in our republican America. These are instances in which the uses of an acquaintance with Ecclesiastical History are manifest. True, the chief business of a minister should not be controversy. He may seldom be called to engage in it, perhaps never. He may preach what he conceives to be the unadulterated truths of Christianity, and never touch, if he can help it, on sectarian distinctions and differences. Still it is desirable that he should be able to defend his opinions when attacked. He will have more confidence in himself, and feel more at ease, and more self-possessed, in consequence of his familiarity with the past history of his religion, with the mode of its reception and administration by various minds and by different classes of Christians, with the foreign influences to which it has been subjected, and the traces they have left upon it, and which it still retains. None of this knowledge will be superfluous, and occasions may occur in which the want of it would be felt as a serious misfortune. Old controversies are from time to time revived, *For Jan. 1842. †The Prelatical Doctrine of Apostolical Succession Examined, and the Protestant Ministry Defended against the Assumptions of Popery and High Churchism, in a series of Lectures. By THOMAS SMYTH, Pastor of the 2nd Presbyterian Church, Charleston, S. C. Boston, 1841. and new ones are continually springing up, and in neither of them will the lights of the past be wholly useless. A quarter of a century ago we were in the midst of an earnest controversy on nearly all the great questions which have divided the theological world, -the Trinity, Calvinism, and the power of the churches. And the controversy on some of these points, though the language we sometimes hear would lead us to the contrary supposition, still continues, and will long continue, where Unitarian societies exist in the bosom of orthodox communities, and in parts of our land remote from us, and well informed champions of truth, as well as eloquent preachers, are needed on all our frontier posts. The battle for liberty is not yet ended, the time of protest is not yet past, nor will soon be past, beyond the boundaries of this little peninsula and its immediate vicinity, if even here. The advocates of religious inquiry and intellectual freedom are as yet by no means authorized to count on their enemies as finally extirpated, but must still sleep on their arms, ready to seize them, whenever the trumpet shall call, and go forth to do battle valliantly in the name of the God of truth. Surely we may say in regard to truth and freedom, that knowledge is power; it puts the weapons into our hands; and if we resign them, the Philistines will be upon us, and the ark will yet be taken captive, and as a sect, or class of Christians, we shall be swept, not from this land merely, but from the earth; I say not within twenty years, if I may allude to the language of last evening,* but certainly in the end. The spirit of orthodoxy has continued the same from the days of Athanasius and Augustine to the present time, only occasionally modified by the protests and arguments of the friends of freedom and a more rational theology; and it is not now going to surrender without a contest. It is not yet in its death struggle. With comparatively few exceptions, if any, it yet closes its pulpits against you, and denounces you, and despises your sympathy, and laughs at your projects of amalgamation, and will continue to do so for a long time yet to come. Orthodoxy is not yet dead nor dying. Let it alone, cease to protest against it, and it will trample you in the dust, or drag you in triumph at its chariot wheels, before the end of fifty years. Such are the lessons taught us by the last fifteen centuries. * The Annual Meeting of the American Unitarian Association. |