Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

If God has, in very deed, given all things into the hands of the Son, and exalted him to be Lord of all, can it be idolatry to worship him according to the rank assigned him by God? Can it be improper or eriminal to pray to him who is thus able to help us, and to praise and thank him for what he is, and for what he has done for our sakes ?

When you say that it must be idolatry to worship or pray to Christ, unless he be the self-existent God, do you not implicitly accuse God of establishing idolatry? For the Divine honors to be paid to the Son are instituted by God. Besides, do you not arbitrarily attach ideas to the terms worship and prayer, which do not neccessarily or naturally belong to them? viz. That worship and prayer imply, that the objeet worshipped and addressed is acknowledged to be personally the self-existent God, by him who worships or prays.

But by what authority do you attach such ideas to the words worship and prayer? May not a child bow the knee to his father, and ask forgiveness for an offence, or pray for favors which the father can bestow ? May not a subject do the same before a worthy king? The word worship is used to express the reverence or respect paid by an inferior to a superior; and in proportion to the degree of disparity, is the degree of homage and respect which is due.

Shall it, sir, be deemed consistent for a poor malefactor to bow the knee to one whom the people have exalted as PRESIDENT of the United States, and supplicate favor? And shall it be deemed a crime to make supplication to HIM whom God hath exalted with his own right hand, to be a Prince and a Savior, to give repentance and remission of sins? It is not

indeed proper to pray to the president as to the selfexistent God; but it is proper to address petitions to him, and to pay homage to him according to his rank or dignity. Nor is it in my view proper, in addressing prayers to Christ, to consider him as the selfexistent God. Yet it is proper to pray to him, and to worship him as LORD OF ALL; as a Being whom God hath seen fit to "EXALT with his own right hand ;” and as one in whom God, by all his fulness, dwells.

And how, sir, can we be in subjection to God, unless we cheerfully "bow the knee" to the Son, and acknowledge him to be "LORD, to the glory of God the Father ?" The worship paid to the Son is called Divine; not because it is divinely required; but because my view the SoN is a Divine Person; a Person of Divine Origin and Dignity, of Divine Fulness and Authority.

in

If you, sir, are surprized to find me thus approving the idea of paying Divine honors to two distinct objects, will you not be still more surprized, should it be demonstrated, that, on your theory, Divine honors must be paid to three distinct objects?

Your theory supposes three self-existent Persons or Agents; and each of these three distinct Agents you consider as an object of Divine worship. As you disavow the idea of three Gods, it would be ungenerous to accuse you of worshipping three distinct Gods. But, that you profess to worship three distinct objects, as God, how can you in truth deny? Is not every distinct person or agent a distinct object of contemplation? And are not three distinct persons as clearly three distinct objects as three trees? Is it possible for you, or any other man, to form an idea of three distinct persons which does not include three distinct objects?

It has, sir, been urged, on your side of the question, that we can easily conceive of the FATHER as one distinct Person, of the Son as another distinct Person, and of the HOLY GHOST as a third distinct Person ; and the difficulty is, to conceive how these three distinct Persons can be but one Being, or one God. This part of the hypothesis is acknowledged to be mysterious and totally inconceivable. Your worship, therefore, must be paid to the three Persons as to three distinct objects; for if you worship the three persons at all, you must worship them according to your conceptions, and not according to what you do not conceive. If you have no conception of the THREE, otherwise than as three distinct Persons, you can have no conception of them otherwise than as three distinct objects.

From my own experience as an Athanasian, suffer me to appeal, sir, to your conscience, whether you ever did conceive of the Father and the Son otherwise than as two distinct objects. When you address the Father, and ask favors through the mediation of his Son, do you not conceive of the Father and the Son as two distinct objects? And do you not consider yourself as addressing one of the distinet objects, and not the other? When you address a prayer directly to the Sox, as the HEAD of the church, do you not conceive HIм as an object distinct from the FATHER? And when you consider the three Persons as one God, do you not consider them as being as distinctly THREE OBJECT'S AS THREE MEMBERS OF ONE COUNCIL? Moreover, do you not love the Son of God as a distinct object from the Father, and the Father as a distinct object from the Son? If you speak of the three Persons as three objects, if you conceive of them as three objects, and if you love them as

three distinct objects, is it net undeniable that you worship them as three objects?

If you say that worshipping one of the THREE is worshipping the whole, why are you not satisfied with the worship of Socinians? They profess to worship one of the three, as possessing all possible perfection. But with this you are not satisfied. And why not? Because, in your view, the other two Persons are neglected and treated with dishonor. The other two Persons, you say, are worthy of the same honors as the Father. And does it not appear from this, that you consider three distinct objects as worthy of Divine honors? Besides, is it not a common thing for writers and preachers to take pains to prove that each of the three Persons are worthy of equal honors? And are they not fond of using expressions of this import in prayer? Is it not, then, evident, that they do consider the three distinct Persons as three distinct objects? When we have but one object in view, we do not say equal honors are due to that object; it is, then, in view of three distinct objects that they say that equal honors are due to the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost. And every time they say this, they implicitly say there are three distinct objects equally worthy of Divine

HONORS.

Now, sir, is it not clearly evinced that your theory does imply the worship of three distinct objects as GOD? Yet to fix upon you the charge of worshipping three Gods, is not in my heart; doubtless while you worship the three distinct objects, you do it conscientiously, believing that in some mysterious, inconceivable manner, these three distinct objects are so united as to be but one God. Such was the case with me, and such it is believed is the case with you.

Suppose a venerable council, composed of A, B, and C, by whose benevolence you have been benefittedYou address to them a letter of gratitude—In the first place you address them as one body or council; then you distinctly thank A, as moderator, for proposing the plan; you thank B, as an advocate, who has exposed himself to insuke for your sake; you thank C, for some special agency in carrying into effect the result of council-You then conclude with an ascription of equal thanks to A, B, and C, as one council. Let me ask, have you not distinctly addressed three distinct objects?

Is it not, then, in vain to pretend that you worship but one object, while you, in your prayers, distinctly and thank each for some distinct agency?

name THREE,

LETTER VIII.

The two theories compared, in respect to Christ, considered as a SUFFERER on the cross, as the SAVIOR of the world, and the LORD of the universe.

REV. SIR,

PERHAPS it may be useful to enter into a more critical examination of your theory, as it respects the character of HIм by whom the atonement was made for the sins of the world.

For the purpose of examination, let it be admitted as true, that the Father and the Son are two self-existent and co-equal Persons, and that the incarnation

« AnteriorContinuar »