The Universalist. [volume] (Chicago [Ill.]) 1884-1897, 1897-09-25

anu ia PpluOoo, CduHOb OS ttuc, buO
whole family of mankind" never had
"holiness" to fall from. 1t is said
that "the first act of disobedience is
fall from innocence, and every sub
sequent act of SHINING is falling yet
further therefrom." Let the truth
of this statement concerning our
'frst act of disobedience," be con-
ceded; but does it follow that all sub
sequent SHINING is no more than a
"fall from innocence" Our expert
ence and consciousness will not let
us hatter ourselves in that way. Fall
ing from innocence, great variety
of influences and motives, some sug-
gested and urged by those who seek
our good, some presented by our own
conscience, impel us to strive to
amend our lives, lead us to attain to
holiness, not to absolute holiness, for
that pertains to God alone, but to
some measure of spiritual purity,
conformity in purpose and character
to the moral law, desiring and in
tending to sin no more; but allured,
tempted, we fall away. 1t is my ex-
perience, is it not yours, that we fall
from holiness? Is our experience
unique? or rather is it not, so far as
we know, common to our race? There
is, then, lapse from holiness and to
holiness we need to be restored.
Will it be said that this cannot be af
firmed of ''the whole family of man
kind" since holiness never was in any
degree attained by all? 1t is sufficient
to say that any rational theory of hu-
man nature and of the saving work
of God through Christ on 'the whole
family of mankind" must of neces-
sity exempt infants, whose innocence
has never been furnished, and imbe-
Giles who cannot chooss either good
or evil, from being in any sense sim
ners and to be saved from sin; and
that no man, unless he is believer
in total depravity and Elves up to his
belief" dare affirm that any human
beings who come to years of moral
accountability and are of sound mind,
have not sought after, and for some
period, however brief, attained to
some degree of holiness, to which, as
the foundation of human perfection
and of acceptance with God, they do
not need to be restored.
The objection in some quarters to
Art. II, that in its declaration that
God "will finally restore" it teaches
"Calvinistic or fiat restoration" is
quite as strong against the substi-
tutes for it which have from time to
time been brought forward in the
General Convention, such as who
will "bring," "lead." "save," gather
in" through whom the whole family
of mankind will finally attain" etc.
II the advocates of these substitutes
have no disposition to find in them
"Calvinistic or fiat salvation" if they
see in them no antagonism to belief
in the exercise of the freedom of the
human will in cooperation with the
Divine will, just as little difficulty
can they reasonably have in accept
ing, 80 far as the declaration respect
ing the will of God is concerned,
the language of the present PROBES
sion of Faith. 1t certainly is now, as
it has been from the beginning, a
fundamental doctrine of Universal
ism, that indeed. in which it differs
from all other doctrines of Gods
will concerning mans destiny, that
His will is fixed purpose that can
not be defeated, but must finally be
accomplished. Less than this is not
Universalism. But mans part in
freely putting himself in harmony
with what God requires in order to
his deliverance from sin, is not ex-
cluded nor antagonized by what our
Profession of Faith declares concern
ing the positive accomplishment of
Gods will.
Objection is further made to Article
Ii. that such is its peculiar construc-
ton that it teaches that, not God is
the restorer, but the "who." In view
of the fact that all our learned men
of the past have recognized the
grammatical structure of the Article
as teaching explicitly that God is the
restorer, employing "the Lord Jesus
Christ" and the Holy Spirit of
Grace" as His instruments in reach
ing and influencing "the whole family
of mankind" and that the common
people have never had any difficulty
in so understanding it, this objection
is simply hypercriticism of the most
finical sort.
Following the controversy on the
word restore" and on the alleged
Calvinism announced in the word
twill" assault has been made on