THE BOSTON REVIEW. FOR NOVEMBER, 1808. Librum tuum legiquam diligentissime potui annotavi, quæ commutanda, que eximenda, arbitrarer. Nam ego diccre verum assuevi. Neque ulli patientius reprehenduntur, quam qui maxime laudari mes entur. PLIN. ART. 38. The Constitution and Associate Statules of the Theological Seminary in Andover; with a Sketch of its Rise and Progress. Published by order of the Trustees. Boston, published by Farrand, Mallory & Co. 1808. 8vo. pp. 68. WE consider the establishment of the Institution in Andover as the most important event, which has occurred in the ecclesiastical history of our country. The ingenuity and activity of our Divines have been hitherto almost exclusively directed to what may be called the Metaphysicks of theology; and this field has been explored by them with an acuteness and penetration, which has never been surpassed,and perhaps never equalled. It was the labours of Jonathan Edwards, which first gave a plausible, or even intelligible statement of the distinguishing doctrines of Calvinism; and the school of divines, who take their denomination from the late Dr. Hopkins, in defending his opinions and carrying them to their proper consequences, have displayed a subtlety of disquisition, which would not have disgraced the most eminent of the followers of Aquinas. The essential and practical tenets of ed and illustrated by a long line of our religion too have been explainas able, and amiable, and sincerely pious men, as, considering the cir cumstances of our country, the world has ever seen. But in that department of Theology, which is called critical and exegetical, which has for its object, the investigation of the origin and state of the sacred text, and which brings to the illustration of its meaning, all the multiplied and important lights, which are thrown on it by Christian, Jewish, and even Pagan antiquities, we have been, to speak very moderately, a century behind the theologians of Europe. Of late years indeed the spirit of inquiry has been awakened among us, and the first advance towards improvement, has been made by a pretty general discovery of the extent of our ignorance. Whether the institution of which we speak had its origin in this discovery, we do not venture to say. But as such an institution, if conducted with only tolerable ability, must ultimately tend to lessen the evil under which we suffer, we heard of its establishment with the greatest and most unaffected delight. The question, "Historick Sketch," which, from the title page, we presumed would give us a complete account of the rise and progress of the seminary. We find, however, it gives us only an account of the " connexion between Phillips Academy and the Institution." It contains a very deserved eulogy of the munificence of the Phillips family, in which we very cordially concur. On such a subject it was scarcely possible that praise should be too extravagant. We cannot conceal our surprize, however, that in a tract, which professes so much, we should find no explanation of the appearance of a coalition between two distinct bodies of men, which the statutes disclose. The nature and grounds of it are certainly not so obvious, as to be discerned without comment, and why none is given, is to us perfectly inexplicable. We will endeavour to supply the defect for our readers, in the best manner we are able ; but as we are left without a guide, we are not secure from errour. We shall found our conjectures only on what we can collect from the pamphlet before us, and make use of no information, which we may have derived from any other quarter. With private report, when we write for the publick, we can have nothing. to do. whether the principles of those, who founded it, were, in our opinion, free from errour, was to us of comparative unimportance. Although we are at least as confident as we ought to be, of the general correctness of the principles, we have embraced, we are far from believing, that we have such a complete exemption from errour, as to wish that they should universally prevail, without further inquiry and scrutiny. We believe, that it is among the most important reasons for the permission of the existence of so much division of sentiment among christians, to nourish a perpetual spirit of investigation and activity on the subject of religion; and of consequence we believe it even criminal for any man to repose in the opinion, that he has arrived at the acquisition of all truth, to wrap himself up in consciousness of complete infallibility, and never to allow his quiet to be disturbed by discussion or doubt. We endeavonr to keep all our sentiments open to improvement and modification from the discoveries of learning and investigation, and if it were the only tendency of this iustitution, to promote learning and investigation, under the influence of piety, we would join with the directors in laying the first stone of their seminary, and, from the bottom of our hearts, would pray, felix faustumque sit. It appears that the original deWe profess then, before we com- sign of the founders of Phillips Amence the review of this pamphlet, cademy extended to affording assistthat we rejoice in the foundation of ance to indigent students in Divinia Theological Academy at Ando- ty, and even contemplated the future ver; we do not lament that it is di- establishment of a professor of therected by men, whose opinions differ ology. The liberality of the relict from ours, and our only inquiry will of the late lieutenant governour. be, whether the principles, on which Phillips, of his son, John Phillips, it is established, are such, as, in any Esq. and of Samuel Abbot, Esq. degree to impair or destroy the good, has carried this excellent design into which such an institution is calcu- full effect; and to their donations, lated to effect. united to the original fund, we owe We are first presented with a the actual establishment of the sem inary. To the "Historick Sketch" succeeds the "Constitution," as established under the names of these persons. From this constitution we learn that it was the intention of the Founders to endow an institution for the support and dissemination of principles strictly Calvinistick, as they are contained in the "Assembly's Shorter Catechism." William Bartlet, Moses Brown and John Norris Esqs influenced by the same honourable spirit with the Phillips family and Mr. Abbot, have likewise devoted a most munificent sum to a similar object. To this second instance of splendid liberality we again give our ready and sincere eulogy Whether their donation was originally intended for the institution in Andover, we find nothing in the pamphlet to inform us We however presume not; since, as we shall attempt to show, it is given to support very different principles, and guarded from perversion by the most jealous restrictions. It is, in short,evidently intended to establish principles, as purely Hopkinsian as the other donation was to establish principles purely Calvinistic We do not mean to say, that the very respectable persons who gave these donations had any other intention, than to contribute to the diffusion of pure and unmixed Christiauity It cannot be imagined, that we mean the slightest disrespect to either of them, when we suppose, that the points.of distinction between these sects or perhaps of any others, have never occupied a very great share of their studies It has so happened we presume, that the management of the donations of the one has been committed to those, who call themselves Calvinists; and of the other to those, who consider themselves Hopkinsians. We hold these Gentlemen therefore, as standing clear of any of the defects which this establishment may contain, and towards them we feel no other sentiments, than those of admiration of their generosity, and reverence of their piety. We leave them entirely out of the question in the observations we are about to make, and shall speak in future of the two funds under the convenient denominations of the Calvinistick and Hopkinsian. It might perhaps be supposed, as "the Associate Statutes" make it necessary that the Professors on that foundation shall be "orthodox and consistent Calvinists," (page 51) that either the distinction we have made does not exist, or that the peculiarities of the Hopkir siaus had been given up to promote the gener al design of the Institution. But a nearer examination of these Statutes will disabuse us of this error. We do not see that the "Associate Founders" have yielded a single inch of important ground. Every peculiar and distinguishing feature of Hopkinsianism is visible we think in their creed, though indeed concealed under a studied latitude and ambiguity of phraseology, which seems designed to adopt it to the different dimensions of the consciences of either party. These are assertions which we are aware convey a very unpleasant insinuation, and require to be supported by very indisputable proofs. We shall endeavour then to show that almost every peculiar principle of the Hopkinsians may be discerned in this creed, which both Hopkinsians and Calvinists have united in signing We shall first of all quote this creed at length, and beg our readers to compare the loose and indeter minate expressions, in which those parts which appear to touch on the differences between the Calvinists and Hopkinsians are clothed, with the precise and unqualified decisions on the points, in which those sects differ from other Christians. I believe that there is one and but one living and true God; that the word of God, contained in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament, is the only perfect rule of faith and practice; that agreeably to those Scriptures God is a Spirit, infinite. eternal, and unchangeable in his being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness, and truth; that in the Godhead are three Persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost; and that these Three are One God, the same in substance, equal in power and glory; that God created man after his own image in knowledge, righteousness. and holiness; that the glory of God is man's chier end, and the enjoyment of God his supreme happiness; that this enjoyment is derived solely from conformity of heart to the moral character and will of God; that Adam, the federal head and representative of the human race, was placed in a state of probation, and that in consequence of his disobedience all his descendants were constitted sinners; that by nature every man is personally depraved, destiture of holiness, unlike and opposed to God, and that previously to the renewing agency of the Divine Spirit all bis moral actions are adverse to the character and glory of God; that, being morally incapable of recovering the image of his Creator, which was lost in Adam, every man is justly exposed to eternal damnation; so that, except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God; that God, of his mere good pleasure, from all eternity elected some to everlasting life, and that he entered into a covernant of grace to deliver them out of this state of sin and miscry by a Redeemer; that the only Redeemer of the elect is the eternal Son of God, who for this purpose became man, and continues to be God and man in two distinct natures and one person forever; that Christ, as our Redeemer, executeth the office of a Prophet, Priest, and King; that, agreeably to the covenant of redemption, the Son of God, and be alone, by his suffering and death, has made atonement for the sins of all men; that repentance, faith, and holiness, are the personal requisites in the Gospel scheme of salvation; that the righteonsness of Christ is the only ground of a sin ner's jutsification; that this righteous man do all, that God requires of him; so that nothing, but the sinner's aversion to holiness, prevents his salvation; that it is the prerogative of God to bring goed out of evil, and that he will cause the wrath and rage of wicked men and devils to praise him; and that all the evil, which has existed, and which will forever exist in the moral system, will eventually be nade to promote a most important purpose under the wise and perfect administration of that Almighty Being, who will cause all things to work for his own glory, and thus full all his pleasure. And farthermore I do solemnly promise that I will open and explain the Scriptures to my pupils with integrity and faithfulness; that I will maintain and inculcate the Christian faith, as expressed in the Greed, by me now repeated, together with all the other doctrines and duties of our holy religion, so far as may appertain to my office, according to the best light, God shall give me, and in opposition, not only to Atheists and Infidels, but to Jews, [Papists.] Mahometaus, Arians, Pelagians. Antinomians, Arminians, Socinians, [Sabellians,] Unitarians, and Universalists, and to all other beresies and errors, ancient or modern, which may be opposed to the Gospel of Christ, or bazardous to the souls of men; that by my instruction, counsel, and example, I will endeavour to promote, true Piety and Godliness; that I will' consult the good of this institution. and the peace of the Churches of our Lord Jesus Christ on all occasions; and that I will religiously conform to the Constitution and Laws of this Seminary, and to the Statures of this foundation. p. 52. The preceeding Creed and Declaration shall be repeated by every Professor on this Foundation at the expiration of every successive period of five years; and no man shall be continued a Professor on said Foundation, who shall not continue to approve himself a man of sound and orthodox principles in Divinity agreeably to the aforesaid Greed p. 56. It is strictly and solemnly enjoined, and left in sacred charge, that every article of the above said Creed shall for ever remain entirely and identically the same, without the cast alteration, addition or diminution. p. 65. The words in brackets are not in the other constitution. This word is used in the other plate. The Hopkinsians it is well known have always agreed with the Calviaists in maintaining the doctrines of the Trinity, of the divine decrees, of particular and unconditional election and reprobation, of total depras. ity, of the special influences of the spirit, of justification by faith alone, and of the final perseverance of the sants. They have indeed always claimed to be the only "orthodox and consistent" Calvinists. They coincide with Calvinists in all their peculiar doctrines except that of imputation, and besides this, differ from them in nothing but in the conse quences which they draw from these principles. No argument therefore can be drawn from the recognition of all the abovementioned principles in this creed, that it is not truly and peculiarly Hopkinsian. we expect to prove is this, that the whole surrender of principle has been on the part of the Calvinists; that the only article in which they differ from the Hopkinsians, is omited, and that almost every important article which the Hopkinsians add to Calvinism is either expressed or strongly implied. All That the doctrines of the imputation of Adam's sin and of Christ's righteousness are parts of the Calvinistic system, we presume no one will dispute. They are most unequivocally expressed in the symbol of faith, which was taken by the original founders, and has always been taken as the standard of Calvanism. The reply to the question, "in what consisteth the sinfulness of that state whereinto man fell?” is this: "The sinfulness of that state, &c. consisteth in the guilt of Adam's sin, &c. The reply to the question, "what is justification?" is this: "Justification is an act of God's free grace in which he pardoneth all our sins and accepteth us |