Thanksgiving Morning 1859—

 

Dear Father

                        It is a regular Thanksgiving Day here. The wind blows cold & raw, and there is every prospect for snow. However, let it blow. If a man can be thankful fifty miles from home, chumless and cheerless, thinking that his folks are eating their Thanksgiving dinner without him for the first time in 17 or 18 yrs, if he can "dine dull care away" in any lawful manner, I am bound to do it. So having eaten my breakfast and attended prayers, and being free to do as I please till 8 o'clock tomorrow morning (mirabile dictu!) I will begin the festivities of the occasion by writing home. After this ceremony has been gone through with, I shall seek out some anti-slavery clergyman, and hear his sermon. I shall then march in solemn procession to the residence of the late H. Clay Esq. and if the family dine at home, shall "celebrate" there; if not shall accompany them to the place where they do dine. I shall then take the girls and go up onto the plain and see the barrells burn—Oh no! No!! I shall not do that. I shall countermarch to the Athaeneum and spend the evening in meditation & somnolence. Don't think that I am feeling blue—oh no—Much as I would like to see you / who are at home, it seems as if the thought that a brother & sister were in Alabama, another brother & sister on the ocean a sister in Litchfield Co. and—a brother in Mass. would mar the pleasure of the old "Time honored". And more especially so since we were so nearly all together so short time ago. If Dr Bushnell preaches I shall hear him. But I told mother I was going to write you a theological letter—and here goes for't. Last Sunday night Prof. Woodrich opened his lecture by adverting to the "Minister's Wooing". He turned our attention to a particular point in Dr. Hopkins theology, viz that relative to the existence of sin in the world, to be reconciled with God's hatred of sin, his prohibition of the same, and his power (omnipotent) to prevent. The Prof. spoke something as follows—"Dr. Hopkins was asked—'How is it, if as you say God could have prevented sin, how is it that he allows it?' 'Why' says the Dr. 'He permits it as a means to promote his glory'. Then the person who is interrogating him says 'God distinctly says he hates all sin, and you say he wishes sin to exist, that his glory may be promoted. Does God permit sin, and wish it, and not wish it at the same time?' 'Yes—God has a double will. One is revealed to us, and the other is not'. Many believed Dr. Hopkins doctrine and were rendered miserable by it. Now whether I could understand this doctrine or not I wouldn't believe it—I would not believe that God wishes sin to exist in the world, and yet forbids it, and will punish those who commit it, all at the same time—But the question is—how shall we get rid of it? It is certain that sin exists, and that God forbids / and says he hates it. God is omnipotent—could he not have prevented it. If we answer this question yes, we must receive the doctrine. But are there not some points or some things which lie out side of power? Can God make two & two five? Can he make a thing to be & not to be, at the same time? No—then there are some things which do not belong to power. Can God make a man a free moral agent and compel him to be holy—at the same time? No—then we have the proposition demonstrated, and God could not, after having created man, free to do as he wished, could not prevent sin. The moment God interferes man ceases to be a free man. There is no virtue in being holy, if we can do no otherwise—God will not punish us for sin if we could not be holy. There is no virtue in the first case and no demerit in the last. In conclusion, God would that all men should be holy—He abhors sin, and is grieved to see it, and will punish sinners."

 

Now—Father—If I understand you & Mr. Gulliver, you account for the existence of sin in another way—at least Mr. G. says, "It is true God forbids sin. It is true he is omnipotent, but it may be he permits it for the best good of all." I distinctly remember reading this in one of his articles against Universalism. What I want to know is if you think that "all things are possible with God" literally, or whether there may be a limitation to the meaning of the passage quoted. Hoping to hear from home soon & with much love to all I remain your aff son Cha^s

 

How does Toad get on with the chores? By the way—Frank said / something about a "maiden speech" he was going to make at the debating society. I know he used to make a good many when I was there but I had hoped he had given that up—If it means that he has joined the N.R.S. I am very glad & may his eloquence exceed the highest anticipations of fond parents & admiring friends. May his fame reach higher, by several feet than Sebastopol ever thought of raising the pedestrial appendages of her rear limbs. May his age exceed that of the ancient Henry (old Harry) Clay and his shadow never be less—Please ask brother Theodore to drop me a line—

aff^tly Cha^s—

 

P.S. No 2. Friday morn—I received your letter this morn. I had a good time yesterday. Dined at Mrs. Hugins—the only living sister of Mr Oaks. There was quite a company of us. I have something of a pain under where my apron would be if I wore one. Perhaps turkey, chicken-pie &c of yesterday has something to do with it. Lessons almost all made up—will be when I next write. I generally make a better rush when I make up than when I recite regularly. Hope you had a pleasant time yesterday.

Affectionately & finally Chas—

 

Cha^s

M. Nov 26/59

SOURCES