Year: 1870

A writer in the Episcopalaan, has an ex-
cellent criticism upon this attractive author,
whose erroneous theology has been working
mischief insidiously in the minds of many.
The writer says the sermons of Robertson
are eagerly devoured, and are exercising
great influence upon the present ministry,
especially in Episcopal and Congregational
churches The writer remarks:


"He has marvellous use of language
Some of his sentences contain more thought
than whole paragraph of an ordinary ser
mon. Many of the discourses are unexcep-
tionable. All are teeming with thought
Some passages are grandy eloquent, some
exquiSitely poetical, some fairly dazzle with
briliancy, and some are badly common
place. But while few Of the sermons are
truly Scriptural, in nearly all there are
germs of what is not true. While strikingly
original, suggestive, and sincerely earnest,
in all the four volumes the sermons are so
tinctured by philosophy that ignores Scrip
ture, by many wrong interpretations, by
morbid irritation against all that is Evan
gelical, by half statements of certain Gospel
truths, and by total omission of some car
dinal doctrines, that they are mournfully de-
fcient in the power that produces conviction
of sin, or peace to the troubled soul, or rest
to the heavy laden. They do indeed stimu-
late thought, please the fancy, liberate the
Imagination, and beget some noble aspira-
tions, but they do not appeal to the conscience
in such way as to satisfy it-they only
lull it by soothing sounds. They stir up
sort of mental excitability. A skeptical
questioning is started. They occasionally
startle like magnetic shock, and lead the
reader to condemn his own mental stupidity
for not himself discovering what seemed so
plain and almost self evident. But second
look at them while holding the candle of the
Lord-Gods Word-close up to them, will
disclose the fact that much which seemed
solid substance is deceptive and evanescent
shadow.


"These sermons, as whole, do not repre-
sent sin as the Scripture does. They do not
satisfy mans craving for pardon and recon
element with God. They do not exalt
Christ as the New Testament does, either
concerning His incarnation or His sacrifcaI
death Concerning the doctrine of Revea'
ton, they are sadly deficient and Incorrect.
The same is true of their explanation of
Baptism and Repentance, and Justification
and Absolution, and the work of the Spirit. In
fact, while profoundly true in some respects,
in others they are profoundly erroneous. A
few glintings of the true doctrine of Christ
are seen, but they are substantially Socin-
ian; and the logical landing place of their
teachings, must be the broadest platform of
the baldest Unitarian and Universaism,-
The first step from Evangelicalism to the
rationalistic infdelity of Theodore Parker
and Francis Newman, is by these sermons
made easy. They skilfully weld together
the Universalism of Kelly with the Unitari-
anism of Charming. Even now, not few
Robert8onites, in our Church, prefer the
broken lights of Frances Power Cobbe to
|


the unbrOken lights of the Apostles.


deeply impressed with the dangerous
tendency Of these sermons, notwithstanding
their unusual intellectual brilliancy, which
is certainly morbid, an attempt will be made
in few articles to show precisely wherein
these sermons do not harmonize with Scrip
ture and Philosophy. The natural greatness
and goodness of Mr.. Robertson is no reason
why we should suppose him to be correct
Yea! though he were an angel from heaven
we could not accept his teachings if they did
not agree with the Gospel already received
And may God send out His light and Hi
truth that they may lead us"