Thirdly, beyond the Established Church, the Seceding body, encompassed with hardships as fierce as the storms, but breathing a spirit as free as the air of their country, are rallying around them the old-fashioned and more determined religious life of Scotland.At this stage of its history it serves itself heir to the Covenants of the previous century, blames the Church of Scotland for being too indulgent, is intolerant of toleration, and has little sympathy with other churches.This body is beneath the notice of the philosophers; and in return it shows its utter distrust of them by declining to allow its students to attend the classes of moral philosophy, and appointing a professor of its own to give instruction in that branch, on which, as on other high departments of learning, it continued to set a high value.The event of that period which agitated lowland Scotland more than even the inroad of the Pretender was the preaching of Whitefield, which moved the common people as the winds do the trees of the forest.
The moderate party affected to despise and actually hated the preacher and his doctrine.The evangelicals in the Established Church rejoiced in his labors and their fruits.
The seceders might have triumphed in his success; but they expected him to identify himself with their peculiar ecclesiastical constitution, and stand by them in the fight for the old cause of the Covenant.Upon Whitefield declining to do this, they became jealous of his influence, and were in doubts about the sound character of the revivals which he was the means of awakening.Out of this arose a very curious controversy, forgotten by all but a few antiquarians, but not unworthy of being noticed.
Mr.Robe, belonging to the evangelical party in the Church of Scotland, and a promoter of revivals and of the lively feeling manifested in them, declared that "our senses and imagination are greatly helpful to bring us to the knowledge of the divine nature and perfections; " and in defending this he asked: " Can you or any man else think upon Christ really as he is, God-man, without an imaginary idea of it?" To this Ralph Erskine, the seceder, replies in a treatise Of 372 closely printed pages, entitled " Faith no Fancy; or a Treatise of Mental Images, discovering the Vain Philosophy and Vile Divinity of a late Pamphlet entitled `Mr.Robe's Fourth Letter to Mr.Fisher,' and showing that an Imaginary Idea of Christ as Man (when supposed to belong to Saving Faith, whether in its Act or Object) imports nothing but Ignorance, Atheism, Idolatry, great Falsehood, or gross Delusion " (1745).He says of Mr.Robe: " This way of speaking appears indeed new and strange divinity to me, and makes the object of faith truly a sensible object; not the object of faith, but of sense." This leads him to criticise various philosophies.He refers to Tertuilian (as quoted by Jerome), who in regard to Platonic ideas said, "Haereticorum patriarchae philosophi." He shows him that the learned De Vries, Mastricht, and other eminent doctors {89}
and divines abroad, had noticed how the ideal doctrine of Cartesius and his followers had led to imagery and idolatry.
He also criticises Locke with considerable skill."There seems nothing more common in the experience of mankind than that a man who hath the greatest stock of habitual knowledge and understanding relating to many truths, yet while his body sleeps, or his mind is in a muse about other things, lie perceives none of theme truths." So "I see no greater absurdity in saying one may leave a stock of seminal or habitual knowledge, though lie leave no actual knowledge, than to say one may have a stock of senses, though be hath no actual sensation, or consciousness of the acts or exercise of any of his senses, as a child not born or a man in a deep sleep; or a natural store of affections subjectively in him, and yet affected with nothing till occasions and objects appear.One may have a good pair of eyes, and yet see nothing till light be given and objects be presented.Nor is it an improper way of speaking to say a man hath not his eyes or sight, though he be not actually seeing.And as little is it improper to say a man hath understanding and knowledge, though he be not actually knowing or perceiving the truths he has the impress of in his understanding." This is a wonderfully clear statement of the distinctions between the seminal capacity and the actual ideas, between a laid-up stock and occasions, by which philosophers have sought to overthrow the theory of Locke.
In regard to the special question discussed, Mr.Robe had quoted the received rule, "<Oportet intelligentem phantasmata speculari>." Erskine quotes against him Hieroboord, " Mens non indiget semper phantasmata ad suas perceptiones." "The object of that idea is only corporeal things as corporeal; but the object of rational knowledge is not only corporeal things, but spiritual and corporeal things, not as corporeal, but as intelligible." " It is reason, and not sense, that is the only help to attain the natural knowledge of God and his perfections." Above reason he places faith." True faith differs as much from, and is as far above, mere intellectual ideas as intellectual ideas are above corporeal and imaginary ideas; yea, much farther than human reason is above sense; even as far as what is above human and supernatural, is above merely natural." It is evident that there are curious questions started, though not precisely settled, as to the place which the phantasm has in thought, and the imagination in religion.We feel that we are in the society of men of reflection and of reading.The evangelical and the seceding ministers of these days are quite as erudite as the academic men who despised them, and are holding firmly by old truths which the new philosophy is overlooking.
