transporting and elevating from its display of God's love to man. But Rationalism would account for every thing.
Next it must be observed, as to Mr. Erskine himself, that he is of necessity forced by his hypothesis thus to speak of it, however extravagant it may be to do so. For unless God's justice were manifested to our comprehension in the Atonement, the dispensation would not be a "Manifestation," the revealed scheme would be imperfect, doctrines would be severed from ascertainable moral effects on the character,—which the Catholic Church indeed has ever considered, but which Mr. E. pronounces in the outset to be contrary to reason, and fatal to the claims of a professed revelation.
An additional remark is in place. The difficulty here pointed out has been felt by writers who agree with Mr. Erskine, and they have contrived to get rid of the remaining Mystery of the Dispensation, resulting from the question of justice, as follows. They refer God's justice to the well-being of His creation, as a final end, as if it might in fact be considered a modification of benevolence. Accordingly, they say God's justice was satisfied by the Atonement, inasmuch as He could then pardon man consistently with the good of His creation; consistently with their salutary terror of His power and strictness; consistently with the due order of His Government. This should be carefully noted, as showing us the tendency of the Rationalistic principle under review towards Utilitarianism. The following passage is given in illustration, from the Essays of Mr. Scott of Aston Sandford.
"The story of Zaleucus, prince of the Locrians, is well-known: to show his abhorrence of adultery, and his determination to execute the law he had enacted, condemning the adulterer to the loss of both his eyes, and at the same time to evince his love to his son who had committed that crime, he willingly submitted to lose one of his own eyes, and ordered at the same time one of his son's to be put out! Now what adulterer could hope to escape, when power was vested in a man whom neither self-love, nor natural affection in its greatest force, could induce to dispense with the law, or relax the rigour of its sentence?" Essay ix.
True, this act would show intense energy of determination to uphold the existing laws, clearly enough; and so did Mucius Scævola show intense energy in burning off his hand; but what is this to the question of justice?
