Page images
PDF
EPUB

not seen a more handsome illustration of this word than I lately read in Cox's life of Melancthon, where he sums up and finishes the character of that great man by observing, that he generally acted under the influence of a purely "disinterested benevolence." But some of our great divines would tell Cox a different story. Those men, who have eaten freely of the Amor sui, pretend that it is either a phrase of false import, or else of no import at all.

The word morality has not fared better. They have condemned all its family: for moral, moral agency, moral fitness, moral depravity, and the like, are all considered as Amalekites, and proscribed. Especially the phrase moral virtue, made up of two most offensive words, they regard as bad as the union of Herod and Pilate. The word moral we derive from the Latin moralis, which is from mos, a law or custom. Morality is conformity to law, and used in this sense. But has the Christian no morality? Alas! some professing Christians have not much. But what did Christ say? "Think not that I come to destroy the law," &c. He goes on to show, that he insisted on a purer morality than even the Pharisees, who make clean the outside of the cup and platter, but what is within ?—Extortion and excess. The great command of the law is love: and says the eloquent Dr. South,* "Love is not so much an affection of the Christian, as it is the very soul of the Christian; he does not so much feel it, as he is in it."

Moral virtue is a conformity to the divine law, or in other words conformity to God. For as God is love, he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God and God in him. Perfect morality, therefore, is perfect love to God, by which I understand perfect moral virtue. This is also sometimes called charity; and as >much as St. Paul insisted on faith, he had no diminutive opinion of it."Now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three, but the greatest of these is charity."

But the principal object of this number is Metaphysics, a term, against which an odium has been excited, and by means of which incalculable mischief has been done. Before I enter

* "An old divine."

on this subject, I cannot but remark, that I consider this as one of the most extraordinary controversies ever carried on; not so much from its nature as from its means and methods. An attempt to carry measures by exciting strong prejudices against words, at the same time exaggerating and misrepresenting the notions pretended to be affixed to those words, and keeping the grand points of difference wholly out of sight: this course persisted in for years, and pursued with boldness and abundant success: I say these circumstances render this controversy, perhaps, without a parallel.

The same things, however, which render this a singular controversy, render it not a hopeless controversy: for while I am perfectly assured that it results from misinformation, in very great numbers, I am assured, with a certainty nearly equal, that they want nothing but a right understanding of the case to come into, and adopt the truth. Whatever pride of character may do with a few men, with whom it may far outweigh the solemn dictates of conscience, the great body of the people have no motive, I might almost say, no selfish motive for preferring error to truth. And I am well assured that, at least, some may be convinced that their credulity has been imposed upon, and that they have been deceived. They may be convinced that error has held an ascendancy over truth, not by argument, but by efforts of influence from men riding on the shoulders of public confidence.

The case now to be mentioned is one of a most extraordinary nature. I appeal to the people of this city at large, that they have been led into the habit of believing that metaphysics have no connexion with religion:-that every thing metaphysical is improper and unbecoming the pulpit, or a gospel sermon and that the Hopkinsians have little else but metaphysics in their sermons. They are very different from the good old woman I once heard of, who, hearing her minister, in whom she had great confidence, say something about metaphysics, replied, O yes, I know that Christ is both meet and physic for the poor sinner." They do not, however, think quite so well about metaphysics, as to think it is both meet and physic for

'દ

the sinner, although quite as much mistaken with regard to what metaphysics are.

1. "Metaphysics, or ontology," says Johnson, "is the science which treats of the affections of being in general" In strictness, the whole of truth may be said to be divided into physical and metaphysical; and to say the least, many of the doctrines of religion come properly and strictly within the department of metaphysics. The term affection, as used in the above definition, is taken in its larger sense, and in relation both to action and passion. "By the affections of being," says Dr. Watts," are meant all powers, properties, accidents, relations, actions, passions, dispositions, internal qualities, external adjuncts, considerations, conditions, or circumstances whatsoever." (See vol. 5. p. 639.)

As it is one object of this number to do away the prejudice and opposition in many minds against metaphysics, by showing to those who have not the advantage of general reading what metaphysics truly are; and, as I have this moment before me the Belgic Encyclopedia, published in the year 1620, and dedicated to the lords of the Belgic League, and also Dr. Watts' System of Metaphysics, I think it will be useful to lay before the reader a compendious view of the subjects of which that science treats. If the reader will keep in mind that it is not Edwards nor Hopkins, and if he has not regularly studied metaphysics, I presume he will not think his labour lost in perusing this sketch.

Metaphysics, or ontology, treats of being, of essence, or nature; of mode and form; of existence, whether actual or possible, necessary or contingent, dependent or independent, whence ariaes the distinction between the being of God and of his creatures. In the next place, it considers duration, creation, and preservation; and, reader, is all this chaff and nonsense? It then considers unity and union; but what doctrines are involved here? It treats of act and power, of action and passiveness, of necessity and liberty, and of relative affections; but is all this nothing? This, reader, was the ground which the immortal Edwards cleared of as many dangerous errors, as Hercules did the wilderness of monsters. It treats of truth, goodness,

and perfection; principles, causes, and effects; of subject and adjunct; of time, place, and ubiquity; of sameness, agree. ment, and difference; of number and order; of mental relations; of abstract notions, signs, words, and terms of art, &c. ; of the chief kinds and divisions of being, as substance and mode, &c.; of natural, moral, and artificial beings and ideas. - Metaphysics is the science of being, and there is not a doc trine of religion which relates to being, which is not, more or less, metaphysical. Man is a creature, finite, dependent, mutable, and ignorant; God is the creator, infinite, independent, immutable, and infinitely wise. Now, in all these, and in all other affections and relations, just and correct metaphysical notions are essentially important to a proper understanding of truth. An idea, or notion, or proposition, or argument, is called metaphysical, not from any abstruseness or obscurity belonging to it, but from its natural arrangement with a great class or order of truths.

Nor has it been a little conducive to the progress and state of knowledge in modern times, that classification, or, as it may be called, generalization, has made such advances; and it was this that suggested to the great Leibnitz the idea, that a universal language was attainable, and would one day be discovered.

Having given a general outline of the proper subjects of metaphysics, I have, under this particular, only to observe, that the want of correct views of metaphysical subjects is one source of the wretched darkness in that theological system which I have styled triangular. As I have said in former numbers, the divines advocating that system are essentially wanting in their knowledge of the powers, affections, and relations of rational beings. And, if we can admit their honesty and integrity, we have only to conclude that their contemptuous slangs at metaphysics, and the still more wretched work they make when they exhibit a specimen of their own metaphysics, must arise from their profound ignorance of that most important science...

2. The infinitely wise and holy spirit of inspiration, by whom the sacred scriptures were dictated and inspired, having furnished the proper means, has left man to the use of his own facul ties in his discovery of natural knowledge; deeming it alto:

gether unimportant to arrange and classify, to distinguish and name, the different departments of science, as mathematics, astronomy, metaphysics. Yet the science of metaphysics, at least, above all others, is abundantly grounded on the scriptures. The grand and leading truths on which that science rests, are not the mere assertions of Edwards, or Locke, or Malbranche, or Stewart, or Bacon, they are laid down in the word of God, either by facts or inductions.

66 Metaphysics, or ontology, is the science of being, regarding it in reference to all its powers, properties, accidents, relations, actions, passions, dispositions, qualities, conditions, and circumstances." Beings, are God and his creatures. Now, I hope that our learned adversaries will be willing to admit that the Bible teaches something concerning God and his creatures; and, beginning with the first of all propositions, that being exists, which, I think, the Bible proves, there is not a power, property or accident, a relation, action, passion, a disposition, consideration, or condition of any being, which does not afford an article of metaphysical truth and knowledge.

Reserving the consideration of this subject to a future occasion, when I can bestow on it that time and attention which are due to its vast importance, I shall here only observe, that a great part of the truths laid down in the scriptures, are metaphysical truths; and the grandest arguments there found, come under the science of ontology. I instance the disputation between Job and his three friends; the arguments and expostulations of Ezekiel; the reasonings of St. Paul, and even of Christ himself. That love is an affection of rational being, is a metaphysical proposition: that God loves his kingdom, and that perfect moral virtue consists in the love of being, are equally so. That men are under obligation to love God supremely, and their neighbours as themselves, are propositions purely metaphysical. In short, the grandest of all propositions, viz., that God is love, is, in the highest sense, a purely metaphysical proposition: and the arguments by which all these propositions are maintained, and, in fact, all abstract terms and ideas, belong to the same class or order.

That I may not be misunderstood, and to save the objector

« EelmineJätka »