Imagini ale paginilor
PDF
ePub

in which Peter, James and John are three, and yet are all one
being; not this, nor any thing resembling this; but simply that
there is in the divine nature a three-fold distinction, mysterious to
us yet evidently revealed as existing, out of which arises a three-
fold manifestation to man, of God as Father, as Son, and as
Spirit; in all, one and the same being; in all, one God. When
to designate this distinction we apply to it the term personality,
we do not mean by that term to imply that the distinction is such
as exists between different individuals of the human family, nor
to institute any comparison between the two cases. We do not
affirm that the Father, the Son, and the Spirit, are individually
distinct as three men, or three angels, are distinct, each posses-
sing consciousness, will, affections of his own. This were to
deny the proper unity of God, as we admit. We do not regard
the word person, or hypostasis, or any other word as capable of
expressing exactly the nature of this three-fold relation.
We are
not sure, indeed, that these are the best words which could have
been selected. But some word we must use if we speak at all of
these matters; and with this explanation we challenge any man to
point out the inconsistency or absurdity, or unreasonableness of
the statement we have made respecting the divine existence.
What is there in reason to contradict the fact that such a distinc-
tion in the divine nature as that we have spoken of may and
does exist? What is there inconsistent or absurd in the idea?
What is there in it which the Scriptures do not plainly reveal.

It has sometimes been objected to the doctrine of the Trinity, that it is theoretical rather than practical, matter of conjecture and speculation, which, whether it be true or false, is of little consequence to mankind.

Nothing can be further from the truth than this view of the subject. As regards the substance of the doctrine, it is not a matter of speculation or theory, but a simple matter of fact, given on the authority of God's word, than which there can be no better authority for any statement. As regards our explanations of the matter, our views and opinions respecting it, there is indeed wide field for conjecture and theory. The same is true however, of all the explanations and views which men adopt of revealed truth. These opinions, views, explanations, of ours may be right or wrong. The doctrines themselves stand upon a different basis, and, whatever becomes of our methods and views and peculiar philosophy, remain unshaken because they are revealed truth. So it is in the present instance. We may speculate and theorize as we please respecting the mode of the divine existence; but the doctrine of a triune God is neither a speculation nor a theory, but a revelation from above. Nor is it true that the doctrine under consideration is in its nature and tendencies speculative rather

[ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]

than practical, belonging to the creed and the catechism and the theological school, rather than to the earnest heart and life of the Christian disciple. Thus it has been sometimes regarded. But we see not how any one can think so who understands either the doctrine, or himself; his own position in the moral universe; his relation as a creature, and a subject, to God the Creator and the sovereign, or as a sinner, to God the Savior, and God the Sanctifier. So admirably does this triune manifestation of the Deity correspond to human character and human wants, that the impression irresistibly forces itself upon the reflecting mind, that while the foundation for such a revelation of himself must exist originally in the very nature of the divine being, yet the revelation itself must have arisen out of that great and wonderful scheme of redemption which from the first has existed in the counsels of God. Strike out this doctrine, and you leave us without a divine Redeemer; sinners without a Savior. No longer do we perceive in Christ one in whom dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily, who is able to make atonement for sin, to save to the uttermost all who come to God by him. We see in him only a man, or at most an angel. But what can a man, or an angel do for us, sinners? It is only our God that can save us; it is only him we seek. Like one of old, we stand at the sepulchre weeping because we find not our Lord. No longer do we perceive in the Deity any connecting link with human wants and necessities, but only a just and righteous law-giver, and avenging judge. How can we sinners unpardoned, uncleansed, unredeemed, approach such a God? How can he permit us to approach him? But when from this cheerless, distant abstraction of the reason, which unbelief would set up as our only object of fear and worship, we turn to the God whom the Scriptures present, how wide the contrast! It is as when one emerges from the gloom and deadly chill of the deep forest, or cavern, into the cheerful sunlight. We open the sacred writings, and find the Deity revealed to us as Father, as Son, and as Holy Spirit, one God. Behold here the foundation of all our hopes, provision for all our necessities. Behold here a link connecting us sinners with heaven, and the everblessed Deity, and eternal life. In God the Father, we find the source and end and object of our being. In God the Son, we find the way and the truth and the life, by whom we may reach this great and glorious end of our existence. In God the Spirit, we find the guide whom we need to conduct us thither.

"I am he that was, he that is, and he that shall be, and no one hath ever unfolded my veil." Such was the striking and deeply significant inscription on an ancient heathen temple. Every one feels that it was appropriate to the place, and full of truth as regards the pagan worshiper, who knew or dreamed that there

was a God, eternal, the beginning and the end of all things, but to whose darkened mind that God had seen fit to make no higher revelation of himself. But with us it is far otherwise. As we approach the Christian temple, the sacred edifice of truth, in whose outer courts man in his earthly being is permitted to worship, we do behold the mysterious veil in part withdrawn; some unseen hand hath rent it; and through its opening folds the eye is permitted to rest upon something of the glory that surrounds the inner presence, and fills the holy of holies. The sublimest things, the most sacred, appear revealed to the earnest eye, indistinctly seen indeed, and in part, and yet really. We seem, as we gaze upon the sacred mysteries, to behold the moving of a sublime and mighty spectacle; one who was in the beginning with God, and was God, and thought it no robbery to be equal with God, him at whose word the pillars of creation rose, and stood in their appointed places, laying aside the glory that he had with the Father, assuming the form of a servant, the vesture of humanity, and dwelling among men. We behold his glory, as the glory of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth. The veil has indeed risen, and Deity stands before us, God manifest in the flesh. We hear him say, "I am the way, the truth, and the life; no man cometh unto the Father but by me." "And I, if I be lifted up will draw all men unto me." "For this purpose came I into the world." "He that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live." We hear him speak also of one whom the Father will send in his name, who shall comfort his people, and sanctify them, and "guide them into all truth."

Again we look, and we behold this same incarnate Word, arrayed in a more glorious form, seated on the right hand of the majesty on high, and ever living to make intercession for us. This veil to the eye of reason impenetrable, is it not indeed lifted? Comes not the Deity very near to man in this manifestation? This doctrine of a triune God, is it not indeed a most practical as well as sublime doctrine, linked with all our hopes, the avenue of our most direct approach to the eternal and invisible One?

Into this doctrine the Christian disciple has been solemnly baptized. When brought in early childhood to the altar of parental faithfulness, or when in maturer years subscribing with his own hand to the God of Israel, this sacred name of the Triune was pronounced upon him, as the seal of the sacred ordinance, the signet of the great king, touched his brow. To that holy name, to that blessed truth, the whole church of God on earth is consecrate. Let us, as an old divine hath said, "walk up and down the earth, with this impression ever fixed upon us, that we belong to the triune God." Let us ever think of the mystery of the divine being with feelings of deepest reverence and awe;

conscious that we know little; thankful that so much has been graciously revealed.

It may be thought by some that the argument in this article against the theory of three divine minds in one divine being, and the theory that there are three divine intellects, three divine consciousnesses, susceptibilities, or sensitivities, and three divine wills, in one divine being, is defective and inconclusive; inasmuch as it does not advert to the metaphysical distinction, often employed by the advocates of these theories, between essence or substance or substratum, and attributes or properties. It may be said by the advocates of these theories, True, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are one in essence, but are distinct and three in attributes: we believe as firmly as you that they are one in essence or substratum; but we also believe, say the advocates of one theory, that in that one essence inhere three divine minds, each thinking, feeling, willing, acting, for himself; or, we believe, say the advocates of the other theory, that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit have each his own distinct intellect, consciousness and will.

This metaphysical distinction and statement, in our view, does not relieve these theories at all from the objections which we have brought against them.

Take the boldest and frankest of these theories-that there are three divine minds, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, in one divine essence or being. This same philosophy resolves every mind into essence or substance or substratum, and attributes; and thus we have, according to this theory fully carried out, three divine substances or essences, with their attributes, in one divine substance or essence!

Or if we take the more cautiously expressed theory-that in one divine essence there are three sets of divine attributes, three divine intellects, three divine sensibilities, three divine wills-we see that it is not really diverse from the other, and is easily reducible to it. For what, according to this same philosophy, are intellect, sensibility or susceptibility, and will, but mental faculties, powers pertaining to a mind? Or rather what are they but a mind, in certain classified relations, or operating in particular ways-exercising thought, feeling and purpose? In other words, three divine intellects, three divine sensitivities or capacities of affection, and three divine wills, in one divine essence or being, are three divine minds in one divine essence or being; which, as we have seen, are three divine essences, with their attributes, in one divine essence.

W. B. Sprague.

ART. II. THE BUCKMINSTERS, FATHER AND SON.

Memoirs of Rev. Joseph Buckminster, D.D., and of his son, Rev. Joseph Stevens Buckminster. By ELIZA BUCKMINSTER LEE. Boston: Crosby & H. P. Nichols.

THIS book is, so far as we know, entirely unique. We doubt whether there is to be found in our own or any other language, another biographical work in which the same peculiar circumstances concur to awaken curiosity and to excite interest. The individuals who are here commemorated are acknowledged, on all hands, to have been among the greater lights of their time. The relation that existed between them was that of father and son. They were both consecrated to the holy ministry; but they held different and in some respects opposite views of divine truth. The father was an honest believer and vigorous defender of the Puritan orthodoxy; the son, without being known in the ranks of controversy, embraced some one or other of the forms of Unitarianism. Between the two there existed an affection that rose almost to enthusiasm, and that seems to have suffered no diminution from the difference in their religious views; and yet often and sadly did the heart of the father bleed at what he regarded the apostasy of his son, while the son manifested the keenest regret that his religious opinions were a source of so much grief to his father. The person who undertakes the task of exhibiting these two characters in the delicate and even painful relations which they mutually sustained, is the daughter of the one and the sister of the other; a lady of the finest talents and accomplishments, whose filial reverence and gratitude render her tenderly jealous for her father's reputation, while yet her religious sympathies evidently are chiefly with her brother. The work that she has produced will be read by different classes with different impressions; and though the number may be small who will pronounce it exactly such a book as they would have asked for, we are inclined to think the number will be still smaller, who begin to read it and lay it by before they are thoroughly possessed of its contents. In the notice which we propose to take of it, we shall confine ourselves almost entirely to a delineation of the two characters as here presented; especially the character of the father, which seems to us in some of the notices of the work that has appeared, to have received quite a disproportionate share of attention and honor. Nor shall we suffer any difference of religious opinion, however serious we may view it, to prevent us from doing justice, so far as we are able, to the son; for we regard it as both impolitic and wrong to refuse to recognize either intellectual or moral excellence, because we may find it in some respects in different

« ÎnapoiContinuă »