CHAPTER XII.

CALVINISM AND HOPKINSIANISM CONTRASTED, BY COMPARING EACH WITH SEVERAL HERESIES.

Many matters of inferior importance, on which a difference of opinion exists, might have been introduced into the Contrast, but it was deemed not expedient. From the fundamental principles, which have been already opposed to each other, the discerning mind can easily imagine how the opponents would reason upon the various ramifications of their respective systems. It is proposed in this chapter to give a summary contrast, by comparing both Calvinism and Hopkinsianism with several heresies. If we wish to see the difference between any two objects, it is well not only to examine them in relation to each other, but also to compare each with a third object. By pursuing this course in the present case, a double advantange will be gained; for we shall be able more clearly to discern the difference between the two, and at the same time, to judge of the tendency of each.

It will be made evident, that some of the doctrines of Hopkinsianism have originated in a collision between the advocates for a general atonement and the universalists; while others, if they have not sprung from deistical objections, or from a desire of compromise with the enemies of our God, Christ; and from the pride of "philosophy, falsely so called;" may certainly be traced down in their consequences, through various erroneous systems, to deism, and in some instances from deism to atheistical fatality.

Those persons, who profess to derive their doctrine of universal salvation from the scriptures, said, THE ATONEMENT IS UNIVERSAL. The Hopkinsians said the same.

Then it follows, said the former, that all mankind will be sa ved, or that Christ will lose some persons for whom he paid the price of redemption. This brought the latter to the necessity either of becoming uinversalists, or of restricting the atonement to the elect, or of denying what the ancient Calvinists deemed the essence of the atonement. They said, therefore, that al though the atonement was universal, yet it was indefinite, and rather of the nature of an exhibition, than of a real, legal satisfaction by personal substitution.

In like manner, the Hopkinsians said, that moral obligation resulted from the right and wrong in the nature of things; and that the distinction between these was independent of the divine will; which distinction fallen man had natural conscience to dis"This clearly proves," said the Deist, "that the volume of nature is sufficient: and, that a needless revelation cannot be divine, must follow."

cern.

Sin and holiness, said the Hopkinsians, are predicable of nothing but created volitions. "And these volitions," said the Fatalists, "are produced by the First Cause, who could not but act according to the pre-existing nature of things. Therefore the nature of things is eternal, and all beings are governed by fatality."

That the inquirer may judge for himself in these matters, and that the hasty reader may refresh his memory, without much trouble, the summary Contrast of several systems will be presented in the form of a theological chart.

Opinions which most prevail in each denomination will be presented in preference, even to the sentiments of the founder of the system. Thus, under the head of Socinianism, shall be exhibited the sentiments, not particularly of Socinus, but of those persons in America, who agree with that heresiarch in his fundamental doctrine, that Christ was not so much as a superangelic being, but a prophet of Nazareth. Thus also, the Sabellians will be represented to be Hopkinsians in most points; for that they are of this denomination, who, in this country, believe that God the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, dwell in the humanity

of Jesus, is certainly the fact. In one or two instances, however, I know of a Sabellian who does not oppose the Calvinists, except in relation to the Trinity and the hypostatical union. Under the head of Universalists, the Deists who believe that all will be saved, will not be regarded; because they belong to the class of infidels. It is to be observed also, that some Universalists are Arians, some Arminians, some Sabellians, and some Socinians; but the great body of them hold to most of the doctrines of grace. These last will be principally regarded; because they alone form a distinct denomination. They are in America, the followers of Dr. Huntington and Mr. Murray. The former was the author of a posthumous publication, entitled "Calvinism Improved It is wonderful that he did not call his system "Strict Calvinism."

The latter has been a noted declaimer in Boston, who taught, until the palsy silenced him, that a complete atonement was made for every man, which will secure all an escape from all sort of future punishment.

The other Universalists of America, that do not openly reject the scriptures, are the followers of Dr. Chauncey of Boston, whose hell was to last, he did not know for how many ages, until the half-damned mortals were made meet for heaven, by the salutary punishments of the infernal regions.

It will be found, upon a view of the whole chart, that Hopkinsianism partakes of the fundamental principles of most of the systems; but at the same time disclaims all affinity to the rejection of Christ's divinity, moral suasion, the resuscitated pa pal hell, and infidelity.

Let the reader, however, while examining what remains of this work, seek for an answer to this question:

Why have not the Universalists, the Arians, Socinians, and Sabellians, multiplied within the bounds of the Presbyterian Church as rapidly as they have in New-England ?

"I speak as unto wise men; judge ye what I say.”

* The reader will please to be guided by the sections, and turn his eye over four pages, before he regards the second article of Calvinism.