collective, or rather upon its cumulative force. Our labors, however, will still be critical as well as constructive; and we shall seek to avoid those extreme positions with regard to the present question, which, on the one side, would tend to bring linguistic science into disrepute by reason of hasty assumptions, and, on the other, would serve to retard its progress by the attempt to show that all comparison in this department is merely a waste of energy.

ARTICLE VII.

DR. HODGE'S MISREPRESENTATIONS OF PRESIDENT FINNEY'S SYSTEM OF THEOLOGY.

BY REV. GEORGE F. WRIGHT, ANDOVER, MASS.

THE death, on the 16th of August, 1875, at the advanced age of eightythree, of the Rev. Charles G. Finney, removed one who had long been a conspicuous actor in some phases of what is called the New School controversy. Educated for the law, he became, soon after his conversion and till his old age, a remarkable instrument in the promotion of revivals throughout the Middle and Eastern States, and to some extent in England. He was regularly inducted into the Presbyterian ministry in 1824. The extreme Calvinism of the time and region in which he began his labors, compelled him as a practical preacher to dwell with great emphasis on the obverse side of the doctrines of divine sovereignty and election, and to give a prominence to human responsibility and the freedom of the will which has led to much misapprehension regarding his real position as a moderate Calvinist. President Finney differed from many so-called "revivalists" in this, that his preaching was pre-eminently doctrinal. His presentations of "the total, moral, voluntary depravity of unregenerate man, the necessity of a radical change of heart through the truth, by the agency of the Holy Ghost; the divinity and humanity of our Lord Jesus Christ; his vicarious atonement, equal to the wants of all mankind; the gift, divinity, and agency of the Holy Ghost; repentance, faith, justificatiod by faith, sanctification by faith," were sharp-cut and powerful.'"The doctrine of the justice of endless punishment, ... and not only its justice, but the certainty that sinners will be endlessly punished if they die in their sins, was strongly held forth. On all these points the gospel was 1 Memoirs, p. 134.

so presented as to give forth no uncertain sound. ... The nature of the sinner's dependence upon divine influence was explained and enforced and made prominent. Sinners were taught that, without the divine teaching and influence, it is certain, from their depraved state, that they never would be reconciled to God."1

His sermons were far more than the vapid exhortation with which some who promote revivals have made us too familiar. Moreover, he was in the habit of preaching long sermons. His pastor and early instructor charged him "to be sure not to speak more than half an hour at a time.” But in his first ministry his "sermons generally averaged nearly or quite two hours." In later years they were of more moderate length; though it is difficult to see how the fifty-one heads, given in the specimen taken at random from his skeletons, could be compressed into a sermon of less than an hour.3

In 1835, on his removal to Oberlin, Ohio, to fill the chair of theology in a newly-formed institution, he began a series of publications which should define his theological views. In 1852 he was elected president of 2 Ibid. p. 80. 8 See p. 97.

1 Memoirs, p. 364. We append a list of his works: (1) Lectures on Revivals of Religion. pp. 438. 12mo. New York: Leavitt, Lord, and Co. 1835. There was an immediate sale of six editions of 2000 copies each of this work. A thirteenth edition was published in 1840. It was republished by two rival houses in England, one of which issued 80,000 copies. A revised edition was published in 1868, by E. J. Goodrich, Oberlin, Ohio. This work was translated into the Welsh and French languages. (2) Lectures to Professing Christians, first American edition probably in 1835. A third London edition, 12mo, appeared in 1839. (3) Sermons on Important Subjects. 8vo. pp. 277. New York: J. S. Taylor (3d ed.). 1836. (4) Skeletons of a Course of Theological Lectures. 8vo. pp. 248. Oberlin James Steele. 1840. (5) Lectures on Systematic Theology, embracing Lectures on Moral Government, together with Atonement, Moral and Physical Depravity, Regeneration, Philosophical Theories, and Evidences of Regeneration. Vol. i. 8vo. pp. 587. Oberlin, Boston, and New York, 1846. The second volume was issued in 1847, and discussed the doctrines of Ability, Repentance, Faith, Justification, Sanctification, Election, Reprobation, Divine Sovereignty, Purposes of God, and Perseverance of the Saints. A new edition, “Revised, enlarged, and partly re-written by the author," with an Introduction by Rev. Geo. Redford, D.D., LL.D., of Worcester, England, together with an Appendix containing "An Examination by Prof. C. G. Finney, of the Review [by Dr. Hodge] of Finney's Systematic Theology, published in the Biblical Repertory, Princeton, N. J., June, 1847;" also, "A Reply to the 'Warning Against Error,' written by the Rev. Dr. Duffield," was issued in one vol. 8vo., pp. 996. Tegg and Co., London. 1851. (6) The Character, Claims, and practical working of Free Masonry. 16mo. pp. 272. Cincinnati, 1869. (7) Memoirs of Rev. Charles G. Finney, written by himself. pp. 477. New York: A. S. Barnes and Co. 1876. President Finney was a frequent contributor to the Oberlin Evangelist, 1839-1861, and the Oberlin Quarterly Review, 1845-1849, and in later years to the "Advance" and "Independent" newspapers.

the college. Of Mr. Finney's labor as a teacher of theology, President Fairchild, the editor of his Memoirs, remarks: "His work as a theologian, a leader of thought, in the development and expression of a true Christian philosophy, and as an instructor, in quickening and forming the thought of others, has been less conspicuous [than his work as a preacher of righteousness], and in his own view, doubtless, entirely subordinate; but in the view of many, scarcely less fruitful of good to the church and the world.”1 It is not our present purpose to set forth in detail, nor to defend, either the methods by which Mr. Finney promoted revivals, or the doctrinal statements which he elaborated. But the severity with which Dr. Hodge has recently commented on that system makes it appropriate to shield it from his misrepresentations.

Dr. Hodge begins his notice of President Finney's system by saying that it is "valuable as a warning"; he concludes his criticism of President Finney's statement of regeneration with the remark that "such a system is a vпódειуμа тŶs ȧrecías [example of unbelief or disobedience]." Dr. Hodge's representations of President Finney are misleading in the following respects:

I. Early Editions of Finney's Publications only are quoted. — On the subject of Regeneration Dr. Hodge's quotations are from the edition of Finney's Systematic Theology published in 1846. On Sanctification the quotations are from the Oberlin Evangelist and the Oberlin Quarterly Review of about the same date. No reference whatever is made to the London edition of the Systematic Theology of 1851, which, in addition to having been "revised, enlarged, and partly re-written," contained also elaborate answers to the criticisms which Dr. Hodge, among others, had made upon the earlier edition.*

In publishing the body of divinity so long taught at Princeton, it was not necessary to give it the form of a compend and criticism of all theological literature, and to surround its ample pages with a bristling abattis of foot-notes; and even on the plan adopted it might not have been essential to give more than a passing notice of President Finney. But since the author chooses to make his erudition prominent, and to add force to his views by numerous references to a wide range of literature, the critic must judge him according to the ambitiousness of the aim. Erudition is worse than useless if it essentially fails in accuracy. A fig-tree without leaves raises no false hopes. It is bad enough if the abundant foliage invites you to a fruitless search. It is superlatively bad if the fruit that is found be positively poisonous. Inasmuch as President Finney's writings are honored by Dr. Hodge with twenty-eight references, it is a misfortune that

1 Memoirs, p. 477.

2 See Systematic Theology, by Charles Hodge, D.D., Vol. iii. pp. 8–11, 255-257. New York, 1873. 3 See Hebrews, iv. 11.

* See Finney, Systematic Theology (London, 1851), Appendix, pp. 916–961.

the author was not sufficiently familiar with his subject to be able to direct his readers to the revised edition of his opponent's work. And it is still more to be lamented that even

-

II. The Old Edition is grossly misrepresented. — § 1. President Finney is represented as substituting the universe for God as the object of our allegiance. Dr. Hodge's statement reads: "Professor Finney adopts the common eudaemonistic theory which makes the happiness of being, i.e. of the universe, the chief good." "The Oberlin theory... is founded on the following principles: first, holiness consists in disinterested benevolence, i.e. perfect willingness that God should do whatever the highest good of the universe demands." 2 "The Pelagian system does not [like the Oberlin] assume that disinterested benevolence, or the purpose to promote the highest good of the universe, is the sum of all virtue; ie. it does not put the universe in the place of God, as that to which our allegiance is due." The nature of these misrepresentations depends on the definition of the word "universe." If Dr. Hodge means by "universe" the creation as distinct from the Creator, his charge attributes to President Finney what he explicitly, emphatically, repeatedly, and in many ways disavows. If it is designed to include the Creator himself in the universe, it might not be a serious charge; but in that case Dr. Hodge has shown a lamentable lack of familiarity with the dictionary, and unaccountable forgetfulness of even his own ordinary usage of the word. Lexicographers uniformly confine the word universe to created existency. Webster defines it, "All created things viewed as constituting one system or whole"; Worcester, "The sum of created existence"; Milton is quoted,

Prior is quoted,

"How may I

Adore thee, Author of this universe?"

"Father of heaven

Whose nod called out this universe to birth!"

So President Edwards, in his dissertation concerning God's chief end in creation, has the following expressions: "Good in view... that inclined him [God] to bring the universe into existence in such a manner as he created it."4 "Designed in the creating of the astonishing fabric of the universe we behold..."5 "Such an arbiter as I have supposed would determine that the whole universe, in all its actings, proceedings, revolutions, and entire series of events, should proceed with a view to God as the supreme and last end, that every wheel in all its rotations should move with a constant, invariable regard to him as the ultimate end of all." His essay on the Nature of Virtue has this sentence: "But God has infinitely the

2

1 Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. iii. p. 11. Ibid. p. 256. Ibid. p. 257. ♦ Works, 10 vols. (New York, 1830), Vol. iii. p. 10.

Ibid. p. 16; see also p. 24.

6 Ibid. p. 12.

greatest share of existence; so that all other being, even the whole universe, is as nothing in comparison of the Divine Being."

1

We have noted in the first volume of Dr. Hodge's Systematic Theology, in which the subjects are such that the word universe occurs most frequently, one hundred instances of his own use of it. Of this number eighty-two unequivocally contrast the universe with God. Of the remaining eighteen instances the larger part occur in the discussion of "Hylozoism" and "Pantheism," in which the nature of the subject renders it difficult to give the word universe any well defined meaning. But these are heresies that neither Dr. Hodge nor any one else has ever thought of charging upon President Finney, whose theism is unquestioned and most sharply defined. The very few remaining cases in which the word is employed by Dr. Hodge are indeterminate. Of his ordinary uses of the word the following are instances:

...

...

...

"To

"We are shut up to the conclusion that the universe sprang out of nothing."" "The cause of the universe must be a personal God.” “We then are placed in the midst of a vast universe of which we constitute a part.. How did this universe originate? How is it sustained? To what does it tend?" "God is not limited to the universe, which of necessity is finite."5 "He [God] was free to create or not to create, to continue the universe in existence, or to cause it to cease to be."" make the good of the creature the highest end is to put the means for the end, to subordinate God to the universe, the Infinite to the finite. This putting the creature in the place of the Creator disturbs our moral and religious sentiments and convictions, as well as our intellectual apprehensions of God, and of his relation to the universe. A universe constructed for the purpose of making God known is a far better universe than one designed for the production of happiness." "God adopted the plan of the universe."8 "The scriptural doctrine therefore is, (1) That the universe is not eternal; it began to be. (2) It was not formed out of any pre-existence or substance, but was created ex nihilo. (3) That creation was not necessary. It was free to God to create or not to create, to create the universe as it is, or any other order and system of things, according to the good pleasure of his will." "We view the Creator as the cause of the universe." 99 10 "Pantheism merges the universe in God." "As the world, meaning thereby the universe of created beings, includes the world of matter and the world of mind, the doctrine of providence concerns, first, the relation of God to the external or material universe; and, secondly, his relation to the world of mind, or to his rational creatures." 12

1 Works, 10 vols. (New York, 1830), Vol. iii. p. 103.

2 Hodge's Systematic Theology, Vol. i. p. 211. 6 p. 398.

10

6 p. 403.

' p. 436.

8 p. 233.

4

p. 239.

8

p. 540.

9

p. 553.

p. 555, quoted from Sir William Hamilton. VOL. XXXIII. No. 130.

p. 605.