The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1882-02-22

After this the question of moral ina
bility is raised, and the answer is that
man is always and anywhere of the earth
earthly; that he is utterly unequal to
live long above passion and sense, and
sure to be defeated in the conflict with
the flesh. But what of moral response
bility, if all these tremendous tenets are
true? Very well is it that DIR. Ellis
meets this point, because upon it rests
the charge which has been so iercely
made against Calvinism, that it is i'm
moral; that it breaks down endeavor,
discourages aspiration and justifes men
to continue in sin. If God determined
my eternal destiny before Eden and
Adam, and if l am unable to cope with
the enemies of my immortal welfare, how
can he punish me as sinner? Is there
any room for moral sense in the Angus
tinian scheme? Liberalism and Ar
minianism have loudly answered, "Nonel"
But quoting a writer who maintains
there is nothing like Calvinism to gene
rate Indifference, DR.. Ellis declares 1.-The
facts bear us out quite as we'll that there
is nothing like Arminianism to generate
indifference" And after placing in a
foot-note an eloquent passage from a
sermon, showing that instead of Calvinism
discouraging man and producing only
the passive virtues, its history is the very
opposite, the essayist points to Paul's
own life as the incontestable proof that
his doctrine was not more ruled and per-
vaded by determinism that his life was
intensely conscious of sin and his efforts
in the direction of righteousness:
Let God have decreed what he may or suffered
us to become what we are, we must be righteous
If we would be blessed. To him that knoweth
to do good and doeth 1t not to him it is sin, no
matter how powerless he may find himself or
how much he may be of opinion that his power
lessness is his sad inheritance and not dis
ability which he has brought upon himself
And if these words sound very doctrin-
al-and may be very dreadful-they
are not softened by this other sentence
where Dr. Ellis says: May I not add
that it seems reasonable as we'll as whole
some to take to ourselves shame and con-
fusion of face for moral evils which we
cannot strictly call sins, the natul es
with which we were born and the world
into which we were born?" Here we
have Unitarian doctor of divinity more
orthodox than the majority of the evan
gelical voices of the day, if orthodoxy as
to original sin involves acceptance of its
culpability in us. Repent of Adams
sin Be sorry for depraved nature-
not many SO called evangelical ministers
now consent to such doctrine. But DR..
Ellis asks if it be not reasonable as well
as wholesome?" DR.. Ellis maintains.
too, that justification by faith was Paul's
doctrine, who magnifes the loving Of
fees OF God ito the absolute exclusion, so
tar as his theory is concerned, of all HUI
man activity" And he adds: eve are
called in Christ, and "only those are
called who are predestinated of God"
Consistently with this there follows the
affirmation, "The purpose of God in sal
walton cannot fail the work of redemp-
ton once begun must go forward to
successful end, as in obedience to blessed
fate ! Such perseverance of the saints
will be condemned by the most out-and-
out Calvinistic church in the country,
and is stated as fatty and vigorously as
1t was ever uttered by DR.. Griffin in that
Boston Park Street Church.
The writer then turns to the Saviour,
and he says Gtalics our OWN: eve shall
hardly distinguish the glory of the Son
by whom this great salvation comes from
the glory of the Father" "Paul's faith
in Christ was faith in person divine in
essence, the representation of the ABSOLUTE
One, the source and the cause of all crea-
tion8 and revelations, and before all
worlds" He insists ait is overstraining
Paul's first born of every creature to
understand that phrase as RELOCATING the
Son to a position among the creatures
however exalted
Touching the eternal state, DIR. Ellis
notices that Paul was too glad to know
that some would be saved and too en-
thusiastic in endeavors to save them to
give his attention to statements concern
ing the condition of the unsaved. This
seems to be, in the conception of the
essayist, the cause why the apostle did
not dwell on condemnation. But he
maintains that Paul assumed that part
of the race would not be saved. He has
nothing to say of eternal hope" nor en-
couragement for the final restoration of
all. The duty of the hour is to work for
those who are predestined, and let God
alone with the remainder.
No general observations upon the sub
stance of this notable article could give
the reader SO adequate an idea of it's
strength and spirit as the quotations now
L. -. Il