American Presbyterian and Theological Review

THE object of this Article is to call the attention of the theological world to a most able, but we fear neglected, author, who is not dead but only sleepeth. We are coming to the grave of Lazarus; we hope to witness a miracle. We trust the Redeemer is there; and, though some of the spectators may say he has been dead four days and by this time savors of oblivion, yet we are waiting for the voice, Lazarus, come forth! and the apparent death will be only a season of suspended animation. We believe, to have Asa Burton appreciated, he needs only be to read and known; and it would be the crowning act of a long life to bear some humble part in recalling his reputation and influence to their proper station.

To the prevalence of any literary performance two things seem to be necessary: first, merit and originality; and, secondly, a power of appreciation in the cotemporaries of the author. The shepherd, in Virgil, who sang to the mountains and woods-studio inani-could only hear a perishing echo. It was Virgil himself that recorded the music and prolonged the

Essays on Some of the First Principles of Metaphysics, Ethics and Theology. By ASA BURTON, D. D., Pastor of the Church of Christ in Thetford, Vermont. Portland: Printed at the Mirror Office. 1824.

song. If President Edwards had published his Treatise on the Will, at Stockbridge, among the admiring Indians, it must have feasted the book-worms and never instructed mankind. How much does Socrates owe to his devoted disciples; and admiration has kept alive all the poetry of genius and the speculations of philosophy. It has sometimes been wondered at, how certain puffy-pretensious works, which have nothing but their levity to elevate them to notice, ever get a place in the world: such, for example, as the Koran, and still more, McPherson's bombast about Ossian. The cause is obvious: there was somebody to admire these wretched performances, or, in the latter case, some eminent men, such as Dr. Blair, the poet Gray, and about all the literati of Scotland. Even to the most valuable and original works there must be appreciating minds which will not willingly let them die; and no tree, however fertile, can ever last and be cultivated, unless there be some eager hands to crop the fruit.

There was another cause that perhaps obstructed Dr. Burton's influence: he placed himself under the shade of exalted merit, and attempted a task which the world supposed to be impossible. The leading metaphysicians of that day had so fully made up their minds that Edwards' reasoning never could be answered, that it was altogether incapable of amendment or reply, they had very little curiosity to pursue the subject any further. This was conceded by Edwards' adversaries. It is said that he was told by one of his Arminian opponents: "Well, sir, you have irresistably proved what neither you nor your followers can believe." Thus both parties were disposed to let the controversy rest and hear no more.

Grant his terminology and Edwards was irresistible; but it still remained to inquire what a new terminology might do: and this task fell into a competent hand.

Dr. Burton's Essays were printed in 1824. But he had been long teaching his system by word of mouth; he was accustomed to take students in divinity, and the outlines of his plan had been long known.

In presenting this intercepted and partially eclipsed system to our readers, we shall suppose ourselves to be asked five

questions: First, What is the System itself? Second, What was there in the prevailing speculations of the times that probably suggested it? Third, What is its value? Fourth, What are its imperfections? and finally, Is it worth reviving, and having the attention of the religious world called to resurvey it?

I. What is the system? It can hardly be called an original. The author was more of a thinker than a reader, and, like our first parent, he begot a son in his own likeness. A perfect invention in theology is not to be expected or desired. An honest theologian must always be restrained by his reverence for the Bible, and by his sympathy with some school in which he has been educated and formed. Dr. Burton's first purpose seems to be to tender us a system of psychology; which science he deems to be an important handmaid to religion. Religion is addressed to man, and it comes from God, the Maker of man, and therefore a correct view of human nature is essential to the explaining and understanding of religion:

"As every science is founded on what may be justly termed first principles, so this is especially true with respect to the science of theology. And no person can be considered as understanding systematically any science, if he is unacquainted with its first principles. And whosoever will examine the subject carefully and candidly, will find that intelligent existence contains the first principles of divinity. It is generally granted, that if a person does not understand the subjects of moral agency and liberty, there are many other subjects connected with these of which he can not have a consistent view, and which he can not satisfactorily explain. Of course he is not a systematic or good divine. But a knowledge of moral agency and liberty involves a knowledge of the principles and operations of the mind. Hence these principles and operations are the foundation of divinity. Without a knowledge of these, a person is not acquainted with the foundation on which divinity, considered as a superstructure, rests. This shows the importance of a thorough acquaintance with the first principles, and the operations of the mind." Introduction, p. 4.

In this he is supported by President Edwards :

"As religion is the great business for which we are created and on which our happiness depends; and as religion consists in intercourse between ourselves and our Maker; and so has its foundation in God's nature and ours, and in the relation that God and we stand in to each other: therefore a true knowledge of both must be needful in order to true religion. But the knowledge of ourselves consists chiefly in right apprehension concerning those two chief faculties of our nature, the understanding and the will. Both are very important; yet

the science of the latter must be confessed to be of greatest moment; insomuch as all virtue and religion have their seat more immediately in the will, consisting more especially in right acts and habits of this faculty."-Edwards on the Will. Preface, page 4.

Religion, being addressed to man and aiming to rectify his opinions and to purify his heart, must correspond to human nature, and must be better understood by understanding of human nature the laws.

He begins, then, his theology by a system of psychology, and he divides the soul into three departments or faculties: first, the intellectual powers or mind; then the heart, or the seat of the affections; and finally, the will, or those conclusions or determinations from which we act. These departments differ in kind, and though united in one person are totally distinct. They are in partnership, but they never invade each other's bounds. The intellect has no feeling, no pleasure or pain, no morality; in itself, no sensation of happiness or misery; it merely holds the scale into which the sensations cast the weights, while the mind keeps a register of the balance. The will is the mere servant of the feelings; it is a mere mental cog-wheel, turned by a stronger power, less visible in the act, but always preceding and governing it. The question whether the will is free, is an idle one. It has no meaning, and is always abandoned when the terms are understood. Man is as free as he can be, but the will has no freedom. It always acts in sequence to a previous power. What higher freedom for himself can a man demand than to do as he pleases? It would surely be esteemed the deepest calamity not to be able to do this. And how can a power have less freedom than always to obey a previous power? Therefore it is no paradox to say that the person is as free as he can be and the will itself is as much in bondage as it can be; and both these truths constitute the privilege and dignity of a responsible agent. But let us hear the author himself.

"The will is only an executive faculty. It is no more than a servant to the heart, to execute its pleasure. The will is no primary principle of action; its office is to obey the commands of the heart. Accordingly, for all the good or evil produced by the will, the heart only is praise or blame-worthy; or every moral agent is to be blamed or praised on account of the good or evil

« Précédent Continuer »

Livres