Part 1 (2/2)

The Rev. A. G. Fairchild, D. D., in a series of discourses ent.i.tled _The Great Supper_, likewise published by the Presbyterian Board of Publication, complains in these terms: ”Sectarian partisans are interested in misleading the public in regard to our real sentiments, and hence their a.s.sertions should be received with caution. Those who would understand our system of doctrines, must listen, not to the misrepresentations of its enemies, but to the explanations of its friends.” (p. 40.) Again: ”As these men cannot wield the civil power against us, they will do what they can to punish us for holding doctrines which they cannot overthrow by fair and manly argument. G.o.d only knows the extent to which we might have to suffer for our religion, were it not for the protection of the laws! For, if men will publish the most wilful and deliberate untruths against us, as they certainly do, for no other offence than an honest difference of religious belief, what would they not do if their power were equal to their wickedness?” (p. 73.)

This writer expresses his sense of the ”wickedness of those who oppose Calvinism” in still stronger terms: ”If, then, the doctrines of grace [Calvinism] are plainly taught in the Scriptures, if they accord with the experience of Christians, and enter largely into their prayers, then it must be exceedingly sinful to oppose and misrepresent them. Those who do this will eventually be found _fighting against G.o.d_. We have recently heard of persons praying publicly against the election of grace, and we wonder that their tongues did not cleave to the roof of their mouth in giving utterance to the horrid imprecation.” (p.

178.) Ah! These Methodists are very wicked!

The Rev. L. A. Lowry, author of a recent work, ent.i.tled _Search for Truth_, published by the same high authority, discourses as follows:--

”When I see a man trying to distort the proper meaning of words, and, presenting a garbled statement of the views of an opponent, I take it as conclusive evidence that he has a bad cause; more when he is constantly at it, and manifests in all that he does a feeling of uneasiness and hostility towards those who oppose him.

During my brief sojourn in the c.u.mberland Church, I was called upon to witness many such exhibitions, that, in the outset of my ministerial labors, made anything but a favorable impression on my mind. I found there, in common with all others who hold to Arminian sentiments, the most uncompromising and _malignant_ opposition to the doctrines of the Presbyterian Church, while there was _not_ a man that I met in all my intercourse, that _could_ state fairly and fully what those doctrines are. Their views were entirely one-sided; the truth was garbled to suit their convenience; and the creations of their own fruitful fancy were constantly being presented before the minds of the people, thereby deepening their prejudices, and drawing still closer the dark folds of their mantle of ignorance and bigotry.” (pp. 65, 66.)

Again: ”It is painful to witness the ignorance and stupidity of men--their malignity and opposition to the truth--who have learned to misrepresent and abuse Calvinism with such bitterness of feeling, till, like a rattlesnake in dog-days, they have become blinded by the poison of their own minds.” (p. 156.)

In this attempt to destroy confidence in the veracity of Arminians, so far, at least, as it is connected with their representations of Calvinism, leading individuals are singled out for special animadversion. Dr. Miller a.s.sails the moral character of Arminius. He says of him that, ”On first entering upon his professors.h.i.+p, he seemed to take much pains to remove from himself all suspicion of heterodoxy, by publicly maintaining theses in favor of the received doctrines; doctrines which he afterwards zealously contradicted. And that he did this contrary to his own convictions at the time, was made abundantly evident afterwards by some of his own zealous friends. But, after he had been in his new office a year or two, it was discovered that it was his constant practice to deliver one set of opinions in his professional chair, and a very different set by means of private confidential ma.n.u.scripts circulated among his pupils.” (_Synod of Dort_, p. 13.)

Dr. Fairchild speaks thus of a pa.s.sage by Mr. Wesley: ”In the doctrinal _Tracts_, p. 172, is an address to Satan, which we have no hesitation in saying is fraught with the most concentrated blasphemy ever proceeding from the tongue or pen of mortal, whether Jew, Pagan, or Infidel, and all imputed to the Calvinists.

One cannot help wondering how such transcendent impieties ever found their way into the mind of man; I am not willing to transfer the language to these pages; but the work is doubtless accessible to most readers, having been sown broadcast over the land.”

(_Great Supper_, p. 150.) He also indorses the charge of forgery which Toplady made against Mr. Wesley. (See p. 111.)

The late Dr. Fisk is charged with garbling the _Confession of Faith_ for sinister purposes (p. 111); and with ”scandalous imputations” against Calvinism. (p. 150.)

It is not impossible that our Calvinistic brethren should be misrepresented. Nor is it impossible that they should misrepresent both themselves and others. I do not admit that they are thus misrepresented by their Methodist opponents, but it is not my intention to refute these charges at this time. I refer to them now to justify the special caution which I shall observe in presenting their tenets. They make it necessary for us to prove beyond the possibility of doubt that they hold the doctrines which we impute to them. I shall give their views in their own words.

Calvin says, in his _Inst.i.tutes_: ”Whoever, then, desires to avoid this infidelity, let him constantly remember that, in the creatures, there is no erratic power, or action, or motion, but that they are _so governed _by the secret counsel of G.o.d, that _nothing can happen_ but what is subject to his knowledge, and DECREED _by his will_.” (Vol. i. p. 186.)

Again: ”All future things being uncertain to us, we hold them in suspense, as though they might happen either one way or another.

Yet, this remains a _fixed principle_ in our hearts, that _there will be_ NO _event which G.o.d has not_ ORDAINED.” (_Ib_. p. 193.)

Again: ”They consider it absurd that a man should be blinded by the will and command of G.o.d, and afterwards be punished for his blindness. They, therefore, evade this difficulty, by alleging that it happens only by the permission of G.o.d, and not by the will of G.o.d; but G.o.d himself, by the most unequivocal declarations, rejects this subterfuge. That men, however, _can effect_ NOTHING but by the secret _will_ of _G.o.d_, and can _deliberate_ upon nothing but what he has _previously decreed_, and DETERMINES by his _secret direction_, is proved by express and innumerable testimonies.” (_Ib_. p. 211.)

Again: ”If G.o.d simply foresaw the fates of men, and did not also _dispose_ and _fix_ them by his _determination_, there would be room to agitate the question, whether his providence or foresight rendered them at all necessary. But, since he foresees future events only in consequence of _his decree that they shall happen_, it is useless to contend about foreknowledge, while it is evident that ALL _things come to pa.s.s rather_ by ORDINATION and DECREE.” (Vol ii. p. 169.)

Again: ”I shall not hesitate, therefore, to confess plainly, with Augustine, 'that the _will_ of G.o.d is the _necessity of things_, and that _what_ he has _willed_ will _necessarily come to pa.s.s_.'

” (_Ib_. p. 171.)

Again: ”With respect to his secret influences, the declaration of Solomon concerning the heart of a king, that it is inclined hither or thither according to the Divine will, certainly extends to the whole human race, and is as much as though he had said, that WHATEVER CONCEPTIONS we form in our minds, they we _directed_ by the _secret_ INSPIRATION of G.o.d.” (_Ib_. p. 213.)

Finally, for the present: ”_What G.o.d decrees_,” says this celebrated writer, ”must NECESSARILY _come to pa.s.s_.” (_Ib_. p.

194.)

I think it will not be said, by any one who has heard me attentively, that I either misrepresent, or misunderstand, Calvin, when I impute to him the doctrine that G.o.d has purposed, decreed, determined, foreordained, predestinated whatsoever comes to pa.s.s, and that he in some way or other brings to pa.s.s whatever occurs.

<script>