The Universalist. [volume] (Chicago [Ill.]) 1884-1897, 1897-03-13
DIR. ABBOTTs OPINION.

look short time since a paragraph
to the end that the Universalist
Church had fulfilled its mission, ano
therefore, as there is no longer any
demand for its existence, it should
give up the ghost and take its portion
with the dry bones of the past. | had
supposed the age of prophecy ano
apostleship had past, but it would
seem a new seer has come to oul
planet, wonderful for self.assumptior
and pretentious wisdom. He condo
sends to acknowledge that oul
church has done a good and needed
work in breaking the bands of Cal
vinism, but inasmuch as the latter
has gone to the wall and the evangel-
ical ranks have very nearly advanced
upon Universalist ground, he virtual
ly says that the time has come for
our denomination to throw away its
hammer and join the throngs under
his leadership
Now, does this look exactly unpre-
tentious and Christian? Really, who
can tell just where DR.. Abbott stands
theologically? 1t is true he has de-
MED many things and implied many
things, but for mercy's sake let some
one inform us what he does and does
not believe. We know where Rev.
Henry Ward Beecher stood when he
occupied Plymouth pulpit. DIR. Ly-
man Abbott was not then generally
regarded as in sympathy with Amer
ica's greatest preacher.
1t certainly seems as though he did
at times beat the bush for the sake
of screening his precise theological
views. Once in conversation with
Mr.. Beecher, | heard him say that the
question used to be asked him, "Now,
if you are Universalist why do you
not go over and work with them9"
"Well," he said, Il thought it all
over and decided to wait and take my
friends all over with me-" Beech
er was always free to acknowledge
his indebtedness to the only church
that has always stood for the final re-
demption of all souls. Now, if DR..
Abbott has come to believe in the
universal Fatherhood of God, and
Christ as the universal Saviour, he is
Universalist and ought to be free
to acknowledge it, joining hand and
heart with its advocates in declaring
it to the world.
As | have read DR.. Abbott's notes
on Sunday -scho d lessons years past,
with much interest and pleasure, I
have been impressed with the feeling
that he did believe in the doctrine of
endless misery as the portion OF those
dying in their sins; but from some
of his recent writings, | could but in
fer that he believes in the annihila-
ton of the wicked; and then from
other articles, have been impressed
with the opinion that he does, after
all, believe in the ultimate rescue of
every soul. Then, perhaps, in the
very next Outlook" he would give
some sentiment or expression con-
veying the opposite idea. In his
eighth essay on evolution, he has
taken precisely the ground in refer
renee to sacrifice and atonement
which has been occupied by our
church for the last century. Dr.
Paige in his commentaries, DR.. Bal
| lou in the Universalist Quarterly, DIR.
I. D. Williamson in his discourses,
DR.. Thayer in his writings, DIR. Miner
in his sermons, DIR. T. j. Sawyer in
his scholarly essays, and throngs OF
others have declared and published
similar views as Scriptural and in
keeping with reason and nature. II
would seem that DIR. Abbott has just
conceived them and presented them
as something new. Mr.. Beecher years
ago forestalled him with like pre-
sentation of Christ's atonement and
sacrifice.
In DR.. Abbott's paper on Whittier,
it struck us as not just or fair that he
should go out of his way to show,
right against what the poet had in
recent years written, to prove that he
was not a believer in the final saliva
ton of all men; for we cannot dis
cover how any one can impartially in
terpret his poems without coming to
such a conclusion. Then, further
more, we heard Mr.. Whittier say in
an evenings conversation that "God
could not be the Creator and Fa-
Their of all souls without saving ALL
and if he did not save all He
could be no Father" 1t is to be pro.
foundry regretted that DR.. Abbott