Welsh Newspapers

Search 15 million Welsh newspaper articles

Y Cymro

The copyright status or ownership of this resource is unknown.
Hide Articles List

4 articles on this Page

-,-OWEN REES:

News
Cite
Share

OWEN REES: OR, A Story of Welsh Life in Liverpool. CHAPTER XXV. -( Continued). WHICH TOUCHES THE SUBJECT OF WELSH PREACH- ING AND SHEWS THE DEVELOPMENT OF OWEN: REES'S THEOLOGICAL VIEWS. f. OUR preachers will tell you that very glibly, Arthur." I know they will, but I sometimes venture to think that it would better become many of them to confess ignorance. It is easy to use fine big words in a general sense; and say that the Divine justice demanded that sin should be punished, and that the death of our Saviour satisfied the demands of that Divine justice but I cannot help asking with you, How ? How does the death of another, though that other be the Son of God, satisfy justice ? Is justice indifferent as to who is punished so long as it gets a victim ? Like yourself, every attempt to answer this question seems unsatisfactory. That there was something more than the necessity of producing a moral impression on the universe of God, that demanded an Atonement I think is clear beyond a doubt. But even Dr. Edwards, who as you said demolished the moral impression theory, when he comes to propound a tlieory:of his own, fails to carry me with him somehow, Owen. It may be presumptuous in me to say so. It is very likely my dulness, but I cannot help telling you how things appear to me. He means to say, I take it, that an Atonement was necessary because sin must be punished, because of the essential differ- ence between right and wrong, that a perfect Divine Being is bound to act differently towards the one and the other. His displeasure must be made mani- fest against sin, or rather, as you put it, against the sinner. All this is true, no doubt, and well put, still it does not seem to me to touch the clincial point referred to, namely, the justice of punishing the innocent instead of the guilty, the doctrine of the unity of our Saviour and his people notwith- standing. If I don't overthrow the while theory of the Atonement being a punishment for sin altogether, then I must admit with Butler in his Analogy, that the how the Atonement is efficacious the Scripture has not explained. I would, there- fore, prefer leaving the matter where Butler leaves it. Give it up, Owen, my dear fellow. Your little plummet will never sound the depths of this great question. I know that such doctrinal scholars as old Peter Morris will undertake to explain the whole matter to you in all its details, and I cannot help smiling sometimes when listening to some of our young preachers who have swallowed a system of theology when going through their college train- ing, laying down the case as if they understand the whole counsel of the Almighty to perfection, but I say again, I would prefer leaving it unexplained, as Butler does." I am quite willing, Arthur, so long as you don't deny the fact. Butler himself shows that the whole course of nature is full of the principle of the inno- cent suffering for the guilty. Yes, the fact is one that is universal in the government of God. You must admit also, Arthur, that there is much force in Dr. Edwards's assertion that the efficacy of the Atonement consists in the doctrine of merit; and I have sometimes asked myself whether it is not the fact that the Almighty treats mankind in the mass rather than individually. How to fit in this idea with individual responsibility, I confess I do not know,—but let that pass. We all know that the whole of mankind may be looked upon, in one sense, as one vast social organism. For instance, every one in a village or a town seems to feel the disgrace of a great crime committed in that village or town, as if he was individually responsible. And indeed, in some sense, each individual is responsible. The character of the criminal is the sum total of all influences brought to bear upon him or, at all events, those influences, of whatever nature, have tended to produce that character; and to this extent, this view is not antagonistic to the doctrine of individual responsibility. You may take the converse again, and think of a great man—a hero —in a village, or town, or community. He seems to reflect credit upon every individual therein. All seem to consider that they merit consideration and reward in consequence of his being one of them. Now, on this principle (which, perhaps, is only a form of that propounded by Dr. Edwaids) I some- times think that there is a fitness of things in our Saviour meriting or deserving our redemption. But then, this makes the nature of the Atonement to be very different to what our Calvinistic preachers make it in our days." There is another view which I should like to give, and that is I think, Owen, you had better give it up you will never understand the question. Whilst you have been condemning all theory on the subject, you are busily framing a theory of your own. You are adding one more to the many theories that have already been propounded. At the same time, per- haps, your theory-I shall call it the 'social organism theory," or the humanity in a mass theory '—is as good as any I have heard or read of. But there, we are near home. It is late, and I must go in, and therefore, I say Good-night.' So the two friends parted. When my friend, Tom Smith, whom I am afraid the reader has almost forgotten, was returning the above manuscript, he said to me:— "I doubt very much whether you will get any of our English people to care one button top about this theologico-metaphysical fiiie-spuii argument between your two clever young friends, Owen Rees and Arthur Williams." Would you recommend me, then, to have it out altogether? I asked, "I will do so, Tom, if you like." Oh dear, no, my dear fellow. I know, Jones, that it would be a disappointment to you, and per- haps to those readers who are theologically inclined, not to have it printed. Besides, it is essential te show how keen you Welsh people are for a fine-spun religious argument, however dry it may be. You make me think of what a bookseller in this town told me the other day. I went into his shop and saw he had bought a new lot of books. They con- stituted the stock of some studious country parson or other, I thought. I turned them over,—they were all theological and metaphysical. I turned away saying,—' Ah well, I shall not become a purchaser of any of those, I can tell you, and I ser doubt very much whether you will sell them very easily here in Liverpool.' Do you know,' he said, that these books form part of the library of a young Welshman who died lately, and that I expect most of them will be bought by other studious young Welshmen before long. My Welsh customers seldom buy a novel; but give them dry, hard theological works, or a stiff commentary. on some portion of Scripture, and they will buy them up at once.' However, let us drop this subject. Your remarks on Welsh preaching and preachers were much more interesting to me, I must confess. But what I felt was this,—that I should have been glad had you given us a full description of that eminent Welsh preacher of yours, that what's his name ? John Jones was his name, Tom," I said, "as common a name in Wales as Tom Smith is in England. This home-thrust spoiled a sarcastic expression that was beginning to play about our friend Tom's countenance at the thought of a man bearing such a common name as John Jones being an eminent Welsh preacher. He therefore simply said,— Well, what kind of a preacher was he, Jones? Tell me all about his method and style, that a poor benighted Englishman like myself "—Tom did indulge in his sarcastic smile after all-" may have some clear conception of what constituted his great- ness as a preacher. I presume you have heard him?" Yes, Tom, I have heard him but I am afraid I should not be able to give you a satisfactory de- scription of him,—it is hardly. in" my line. But if you are really anxious to know more about him. I'll tell you what I will do. The life of this John J ones has been written in a most masterly way by the Rev. Owen Thomas, D.D.; himself an eminent and eloquent Welsh preacher in this town. The Rev. John Thomas, D. D., brother of the biographer, a preacher of another denomination, has written a graphic description of John Jones's style of preach- ing, and if you like, I shall, for your benefit, trans- late that account into English as well as I can.- What say you ? I shall be delighted, Jones." Very well, it shall be done in the next chapter." RHYDDERCH JONES. — o —

Il. AELWYD Y GAN.

GWREICHION.

Advertising