Question: Hoiv  tvas  their  claira  confirmed?

Answer: 1st. Their claim Avas confirmed to their cotemporaries by the miracles they wrought, by the fulfilment of many of their predictions (Num. xvi. 28, 29), by the holiness of their lives, the moral and spiritual perfection of their doctrine, and the practical adaptation of the religious system they revealed to the urgent wants of men. THE STATEMENTS OF SCRIPTURE. ^^. , 2d. Their claim is confirmed to us principally — (1.) By the remarkable fulfillment, in far subsequent ages, of many of their prophesies. (2.) By the evident relation of the sym- bolical relio-ion which they promulgated to the facts and doc- trines of Christianity, proving a divine preadjustment of the type to the antitype. (3.) By the indorsement of Christ and his apostles. 14. What are the formulas hy lolnch quotations from the Old Testament are introduced into the Neiv, and hoiu do these forms of expression prove the inspiration of the ancient Scriptures ? "The Holy Ghost saith," Heb. iii. 7. "The Holy Ghost this signifying," Heb. ix. 8. "God saith," Acts ii. 17, and Isa. xliv. 3; 1 Cor. ix. 9, 10, and Deut. xxv. 4. "The Scriptures saith," Kom. iv. 3; Gal. iv. 30. "It is written," Luke xviii. 31; xxi. 22; John ii. 17; xx. 31. "The Lord by the mouth of his ser- vant David says," Acts iv. 25, and Ps. ii. 1, 2. "The Lord lim- iteth in David a certain day, saying," Heb. iv. 7; Ps. xcv. 7. "David in spirit says," Matt. xxii. 43, and Ps. ex. 1. Thus these Old Testament Avritings are what God saith, what God saith by David, etc., and are quoted as the author- itative basis for conclusive argumentation; therefore they must have been inspired. 15. Hoio may the Inspiration of the Old Testament ivriters he 'proved hy the express declarations of the Neio Testament ? Luke i. 70; Heb. i. 1 ; 2 Tim. iii. 16 ; 1 Pet. i. 10-12 ; 2 Pet. i. 21. 16. What is the argument on this suhject draivnfrom the manner in ivhich Christ and his apostles argue from the Old Testament as of final authority? Christ constantly quotes the Old Testament, ]\Iatt. xxi. 13 ; xxii. 43. He declares that it can not be falsified, John vii. 23; X. 35; that the whole law must be fulfilled. Matt. v. 18; and all things also foretold concerning himself "in ]\Ioses, the projjhets, and the Psalms," Luke xxiv. 44. The apostles habitually quote the Old Testament in the same manner, "That it might be ful- filled which was written," is with them a characteristic formula, Matt. i. 22; ii. 15, 17, 23; John xii. 38; xv. 25; etc. They all appeal to the words of Scripture as of final authority. This certainly proves infallibility. 72 INS FIR A TION. The Phenomexa of Scripture considered as Evidence of the Nature AND Extent of its Inspiration. 17. Wliat evidence do the Phenomena of the Scriptures afford as to nature and extent of the human causes conspiring to produce them ? Every part of Scriptiire alike bears evidence of a human origin. Tlie writers of all the books were men, and the process of composition through Avhich they originated was character- istically human. The personal characteristics of thought and feeling of these writers have acted spontaneously in their lit- erary activity, and have given character to their writings in a manner precisely similar to the effect of character upon writing in the case of other men. They wrote from human impulses, on special occasions, with definite design. Each views his subject from an individual standpoint. They gather their ma- terial I'rom all sources, — personal experience and observation, ancient documents, and contemporary testimony. They ar- range their material with reference to their special purpose, and draw inferences from principles and facts according to the more or less logical habits of their own minds. Their emotions and imaginations are spontaneously exercised, and flow as co-factors with their reasoning into their compositions. The limitations of their personal knowledge and general mental condition, and the defects of their habits of thought and style, are as obvious in their writings as any other personal charac- teristics. They use the language and idiom proper to their nation and class. They adopt the iisus loquendi of terms cur- rent among their people, without committing themselves to the philosophical ideas in which the usage originated. Their mental habits and methods were those of their nation and gen- eration. They were for the most part Orientals, and hence their writings abound Avith metaphor and symbol; and al- though always reliable in statement as far as required for their purpose, they never aimed at the-definiteness of enumeration, or chronological or circumstantial narration, which character- izes the statistics of modern western nations. Like all purely literary men of every age, they describe the order and the facts of nature according to their appearances, and not as related to their abstract law or cause. Some of these facts have, by many careless thinkers, been supposed to be inconsistent with the asserted fact of divine guidance. But it is evident, upon reflection, that if God is to reveal himself at all, it must be under all the limits of human modes of thought and speech. And if he inspires human agents THE PHENOMENA OF SCRIPTURE. 73 to communicate bis revelation in writing, he must use them in a manner consistent with their nature as rational and sponta- neous agents. And it is evident that all the distinctions be- tween the different degrees of perfection in human knowledge, and elegance in human dialect and style, are nothing when viewed in the light of the common relations of man to God. He obviously could as well reveal himself through a peasant as tlu'ough a philosopher; and all the better Avhen the per- sonal characteristics of the peasant were providentially and graciously preadjusted to the special end designed. 1 18. What evidence do the Phenomena of the Scriptures afford as to the nature and extent of the divine agency exercised in their production ? 1st. Every part of Scripture affords moral and spiritual evi- dence of its divine origin. This is, of course, more conspicuous in some portions than in others. There are transcendant truths revealed, a perfect moralit}^ an unveiling of the absolute per- fections of the Godliead, a foresight of future events, a heart- searching and rein -trying knowledge of the secrets of the human soul, a light informing the reason and an authority binding the conscience, a practical grasp of all the springs of human experience and life, all of which can only have orig- inated in a divine source. These are characteristics of a lai-ge portion of the Scriptures, and of the Scriptures alone in all lit- erature, and together with the accompan^'ing witness of the Holy Ghost, these are practically the evidences upon which the faith of a majority of believers rests. 2d. But another characteristic of the Scriptures, taken in connection with the foregoing, proves incontestibly their divine origin as a whole and in every part. The sacred Scriptures are an organism, that is an whole composed of many parts, the parts all differing in matter, form, and structiu'e from each other, like the several members of the human body, yet each adjusted to each other and to the whole, through the most intricate and delicate correlations mediating a common end. Scripture is the record and interpretation of redemption. Re- demption is a work which God has prepared and wrought out by manj' actions in succession through an historical process occupying centuries. A supernatural providence has flowed forward evolving a s^'stem of divine interventions, accompanied and interpreted by a supernatural ly informed and guided order of prophets. Each writer has his own special and temporary occasion, theme, and audience. And yet each contributed to build up the common organism, as the providential history has advanced, each special writing beyond its temporary purpose 74 INSPIRA TION. taking its permanent place as a member of the whole, the gospel fulfilling the law, antitype has answered to type and fulfilment to prophecy, history has been interpreted by doc- trine, and doctrine has given law to duty and to life. The more minutely the contents of each book are studied in the light of its special purpose, the more wonderfully various and exact will its articulations in the general system and ordered structure of the whole be discovered to be. This is the highest conceivable evidence of design, which in the present case is the proof of a divine supernatural influence comprehending the Avhole, and reaching to every part, through sixteen centuries, sixty-six distinct writings, and about forty co-operating human agents. Thus the divine agency in the genesis of every part of Scripture is as clearly and certainly determined as it is in the older genesis of the heavens and the earth. 19. What 'is the objection to this doctrine drawn from the free manner in ivhicJi the Neio Testament writers quote those of the Old Testament, and the ansiver to that objection ? In a majority of instances the New Testament wjfiters quote those of the Old Testament with perfect verbal accuracy. Some- times they quote the Septuagint version, when it conforms to the Hebrew ; at others they substitute a new version ; and at other times again they adhere to the Septuagint, when it differs from the Hebrew. In a number of instances, which however are comparatively few, their quotations from the Old Testament are made very freely, and in apparent accommodation of the literal sense. Rationalistic interpreters have argued from this last class of quotations that it is impossible that both the Old Testament writer quoted from, and the New Testament writer quoting, could have been the subjects of plenary inspiration, because, say they, if the ipsissima verba were infallible in the first in- stance, an infallilDle writer would have transferred them un- changed. But surely if a human author may quote himself freely, changing the expression, and giving a new turn to his thought in order to adapt it the more perspicuously to his present purpose, the Holy Spirit may take the same liberty with his own. The same Spirit that rendered the Old Testa- ment writers infallible in writing only pure truth, in the very form that suited liis purpose then, has rendered the New Tes- tainout writers infallible in so using the old materials, that Avhile they elicit a new sense, they teach only the truth, the very truth moreover contemplated in the mind of God from the beginning, and they teach it with divine authority. — See Fairbairn's " Herm. Manual," Part HI. Each instance of such OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 75 quotation should be examined in detail, as Dr. Fairbairn has done. 20. What objection to the doctrine of Plenary Inspiration is draivn from the alleged fact that ^'■Discrepancies" exist in the Scriptural Text? and how is this ohjection to he ansivered? It is objected that the sacred text contains numerous state- ments which are inconsistent with other statements made in some part of Scripture itself, or with some certainly ascertained facts of history or of science. It is obvious that such a state of facts, even if it could be proved to exist, would not, in opposition to the abundant pos- itive evidence above adduced, avail to disprove the claim that the Scriptures are to some extent and in some degree the pro- duct of divine inspiration. The force of the objection would depend essentially upon the number and character of the in- stauces of discrepancy actually proved to exist, and would bear not upon the fact of Inspiration, but upon its nature and degree and extent. The fact of the actual existence of any such "discrepancies," it is evident, can be determined only by the careful examina- tion of each alleged case separately. This examination belongs to the departments of Biblical Criticism and Exegesis. The following considerations, however, are evidently well-grounded, and sufficient to allay all apprehension on the subject. 1st. The Church has never held the verbal infallibility of our translations, nor the perfect accuracy of the copies of the original Hebrew and Greek Scriptures now possessed by us. These copies confessedly contain many "discrepancies" resulting from frequent transcription. It is, nevertheless, the unanimous testimony of Christian scholars, that while these variations embarrass the interpretation of many details, they neither involve the loss nor abate the evidence of a single es- sential fact or doctrine of Christianity. And it is moreover reassuring to know that believing criticism, by the discovery and collation of more ancient and accurate copies, is con- stantly advancing the Church to the possession of a more per- fect text of the original Scriptures than she has enjoyed since the apostolic age. 2d. The Church has asserted absolute infallibility only of the original autograph copies of the Scriptures as they came from the hands of their inspired writers. And even of these she has not asserted infinite knowledge, but only absolute in- fallibility in stating the matters designed to be asserted. A " discrepancy," therefore, in the sense in which the new critics affirm and the Church denies its existence, is a form of state- 76 INSPIRA TION. ment existing in the original text of the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures evidently designed to assert as true that which is in plain irreconcilable contradiction to other statements exist- ing in some other portions of the same original text of Script- ure, or to some other certainly ascertained element of human knowledge. A "discrepancy" fulfilling in every particular this definition must be proved to exist, or the Church's doctrine of plenary verbal inspiration remains unaffected. 3d. It is beyond question, that, in the light of all that the Scriptures themselves assert or disclose as to the nature and the extent of the divine influence controlling their genesis, and as to their authority over man's conscience and life as the voice of God, the existence of any such "discrepancies" as above de- fined is a violent improbability. Those who assert the exist- ence of one or more of them must bring them out, and prove to the community of competent judges, that all the elements of the above definition meet in each alleged instance, not prob- ably merely, but beyond the possibility of doubt. The onus probandi rests exclusively on them. 4th. But observe that this is for them a very difficult task to perform, one in any instance indeed hardly possible. For to make good their point against the vast presumptions opposed to it, they must prove over and over again in the case of each alleged discrepancy each of the following points: (1.) That the alleged discrepant statement certainly occurred in the veritable autograph copy of the inspired writing containing it. (2.) That their interpretation of the statement, which oc- casions the discrepancy, is the only possible one, the one it was certainly intended to bear. The difficulty of this will be apprehended wlien we estimate the inherent obscurity of an- cient narratives, unchronological, and fragmentary, with a background and surroundings of almost unrelieved darkness. This condition of things which so often puzzles the interpreter, and prevents the apologist from proving the harmony of the narrative, with equal force baffles all the ingenious efforts of the rationalistic critic to demonstrate the "discrepancy." Yet this he must do, or the presumption will remain that it does not exist, (3.) He must also prove that the facts of science or of history, or the Scriptural statements, with whicli the state- ment iu cjuestion is asserted to be inconsistent, are real facts or real parts of the autograph text of canonical Scripture, and that the sense in whicJi they are found to be inconsistent with the statement in question is the only sense they can rationally bear. (4.^ Wlien the reality of the opposing facts or statements is determnied, and their true interpretation is ascertained, then it must, in conclusion, be shown not only that they appear incon- OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 77 sistent, nor merely that their reconciliation is impossible in our present state of knowledge, but that they are in themselves essentially incapable of being reconciled. 5th. Finally it is sufficient for the present purpose, to point to the fact that no single case of " discrepancy," as above de- fined, has been so proved to exist as to secure the recognition of the community of believing scholars. Difficulties in inter- pretation and apparently irreconcilable statements exist, but no "discrepancy" has been proved. Advancing knowledge re- moves some difficulties and discovers others. It is in the high- est degree probable that perfect knowledge would remove all. 21. Explain the meaning of such passages as 1 Cor. vii. 6 and 12 and 40, Rom. iii. 5 and vi. 19, and Gal. iii. 15, and slioiv their 'perfect consistency ivitli the fact of the plenary inspiration of the lohole Bible. " I speak as a man," is a phrase occurring frequently, and its sense is determined by the context. In Romans iii. 5, it signifies that Paul was, for argument's sake, using the language common to men; it was the Jews' opinion, not his own. In Rom. vi. 19, it signifies "in a manner adapted to human comprehension," and in Gal. iii. 15, it signifies "I use an illustration drawn from human affairs," etc. " I speak this b}^ permission, not of commandment." — 1 Cor. vii. 6, refers to verse ii. IMarriage was always permitted, but under certain circumstances inexpedient. "And unto the married I command, yet not I but the Lord." "But to the rest speak I, not the Lord." — 1 Cor. vii. 10 and 12. Reference is here made to Avhat the "Lord," that is Christ, taught in person Avhile on earth. The distinction is made between what Christ taught while on earth, and what Paul teaches. As Paid puts his word here on an equal basis of authority with Christ's Avord, it of course implies that Paul claims an inspiration which makes his Avord equal to that of Christ in infallibility and authority. "And I think also that I have the Spirit of God." — 1 Cor. vii. 40. "/ think (SokcS) I have, is only, agreeably to Greek usage, an urbane Avay of saying, I have (comp. Gal. ii. 6, 1 Cor. xii. 22). Paul was in no doubt of his l)eing an organ- of the Holy Ghost." Hodge, " Com. on First Corinthians." Defective Statemext of the Doctrine. 22. State ivhat is meant by theological ivriters by the inspira- tion '"''of sv/perintendence^^ '■'' of elevation,'' '■'' of direction" and '•'"of suggestion." 78 INS FIR A TION. Certain writers on this subject, confounding the distinction between inspiration and revelation, and using the former term to express the whole divine influence of which the sacred writers were the subjects, first, in knowing the truth, second, in writing it, necessarily distinguish between different degrees of inspira- tion in order to accommodate their theory to the facts of the case. Because, ^rs^, some of the contents of Scripture evidently might be known without supernatural aid, while much more as evidently could not; second, the different Avriters exercised their natural faculties, and carried their individual peculiarities of thought, feeling, and manner into their writings. By the "inspiration of superintendence," these writers meant precisely what we have above given as the definition of inspira- tion. By the "inspiration of elevation," they meant that divine influence which exalted their natural faculties to a degree of energy otherwise unattainable. By the "inspiration of direction," they meant that divine in- fluence which guided the writers in the selection and dispo- sition of their material. By the " inspiration of suggestion," they meant that divine influence which directly suggested to their minds new, and otherwise unattainable truth.


Question: What  objections  may  be  fairly  made  to  these  distinctions  ?

Answer: 1st. These distinctions spring from a prior failure to distin- guish between revelation the frequent, and inspiration the con- stant, phenomenon presented by Scripture; the one furnishing the material when not otherwise attainable, the other guiding the writer at every point, (1) in securing the infallible truth of all he writes; and (2) in the selection and distribution of his material. ' 2d. It is injurious to distinguish between different degrees of inspiration, as if the several portions of the Scriptures were in different degrees God's word, wdiile in truth the whole is equally and absolutely so. False Doctrines of Inspiration. 24. What Principles necessarily lead to the denial of any super- natural Inspiration ? All philosophical principles or tendencies of thought which exclude the distinction between the natural and the supernat- ural necessarily lead to the denial of Inspiration in the sense affirmed by the Church. Tliese are, for example, all Panthe- istic, Materialistic, and Naturalistic principles, and of course Rationalistic principles in all their forms. FALSE DOCTRINES OF. 79 25. In what several forms has the doctrine of a Partial Inspi- ration of the Scriptures been held? 1st. It has been maintained that certain books were the subjects of plenary inspiration, while others were produced with only a natural providential and gracious assistance of God. S. T. Coleridge admittted the plenary inspiration of "the law and the prophets, no jot or tittle of which can pass unfulfilled," while he denied it of the rest of the canon. 2d. ]\Iany have admitted that the moral and spiritual ele- ments of the Scriptures, and their doctrines as far as these relate to the nature and purposes of God not otherwise ascer- tainable, are products of inspiration, but deny it of the his- torical and biographical elements, and of all its allusions to scientific facts or laws. 3d. Others admit that the inspiration of the writers con- trolled their thoughts, but deny that it extended to its verbal expression. In one, or in all of these senses, different men have held that the Scriptures are only "partially" inspired. All such deny that they "are the word of God" as affirmed by the Scriptures themselves and by all the historical Churches, and admit merely that they ^'■contain the word of God." 26. State the doctrine of Gracious Inspiration. Coleridge, in his " Confessions of an Inquiring Spirit," Let- ter vii., holds that the Scriptures, except the Law and the Prophets, were produced by their writers assisted by "the highest degree of that grace and communion with the Spirit which the Church under all circumstances, and every regen- erate member of the Church of Christ, is permitted to hope and instructed to pray for." This is the doctrine of Maurice ("Theological Essays," p. 339) and virtually that of Morell (" Philosophy of Religion," p. 186) and of the Quakers. These admit an objective supernatural revelation, and that this is contained in the Scriptures, which are highly useful, and in such a sense an authoritative standard of faith and practice; that no pretended revelation which is inconsistent with Script- ure can be true, and that they are a judge in all controversies between Christians. Nevertheless they hold that the Script- ures are only " a secondary rule, subordinate to the Spirit from whom they have all their excellency," which Spirit illumes every man in the world, and reveals to him either with, or without the Scriptures, if they are unknoAvn, all the knowl- edge of God and of his will Avhicli are necessary for his salva- tion and guidance, on condition of his rendering a constant 80 INSPIRA TION. obedience to that light as thus graciously communicated to liim and to all men. "Barclay's Apology, Theses Theological," Propositions i., ii., and iii. AuTHOBITATrv^ STATEMENTS. Roman Catholic. — " Decrees of Council of Trent" Sess. iv. " Which gospel . . . our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, first promulgated with his own mouth, and then commanded to be i^reached by his apostles to every creature, . . . and seeing clearly that this truth and discipline are contained in the written books, and the unwritten tradition, which received by the apostles from the mouth of Christ himself, or from the apostles themselves, the Holy Ghost dictating, have come down even unto us, transmitted as it were from hand to hand : [the Synod] folloAving the example of the orthodox Fathers, receives and venerates with an equal affection of piety and reverence, all the books both of the Old and of the New Testament- — seeing God is the author of both — as also the said tra- ditions, as well those appertaining to faith as to morals, as having been dictated, either by Christ's own word of mouth, or by the Holy Ghost, and preserved in the Catholic Church by a continuous succession." ^'■Dogmatic Decrees of the Vailca/i Council,'^ 1870, Sess. iii., Ch. ii. "Further this supernatural revelation, according to the universal belief of the Church, declared by the sacred Synod of Trent, is contained in the Avritten books and unwritten traditions which have come down to us, having been received by the apostles from the mouth of Christ himself, or from the apostles themselves, by the dictation of the Holy Spirit, have been transmitted as it were from hand to hand. And these books of the Old and New Testament are to be received as sacred and canon- ical, in their integrity, with all their j^arts, as they are enumerated in the decree of the said Council, and are contained in the ancient Edition of the Vulgate. These the Church holds to be sacred and canonical, not because having been carefully composed by mere human industry, they were afterwards approved by her authority, nor merely because they contain revelation with no admixture of error ; but because, having been written by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, they have God for their author, and have been delivered as such to the Church herself." LuTHEKAN. — " FurmuLa Concordup Epitome." 1. "We believe, con- fess, and teach that the only nile and norm, according to which all dog- mas and all doctors ought to be esteemed and judged, is no other whatever than the prophetic and apostolic writings of the Old and New Testament, as it is written, Ps. cxix. 105, and Gal. i. 8." Reformed. ^ — "Second He/retic Confession," Gh. i. Concerning Holy Scripture. "We believe and confess, that the canonical ScriiJtures of the holy pi'ophets and apostles of each Testament are the true word of God, and that they possess sufficient authority from themselves alone and not from man. For God himself sjioke to the fathers, to the projihets, and to tlie apostles, and continues to speak to us through the Holy Scriptures." " IV/e Behjic Confession," Art. iii. "We confess that this word of God was not sent nor deUvered by the "will of man, but that liol;/ men of God spake <ts they were moved ht/ the Holy Ghost, as the apostle Peter saitli. And that afterwards God, from a special care which he has for us and our salvation, commanded his servants, the prophets and a]30stles, CREED STATEMENTS. 81 to commit his revealed word to writing, and he himself wrote with his own finger the two tables of the law. Therefore we call such writings holj and divine Scriptures." "Weslmuister Confession of Faith," Chap. i. "Therefore it pleased the Lord, at sundry times and in divers manners, to reveal himself and to declare his will unto his Church; and afterwards, for the better pre- serving and propagating of the truth, and for the more sure establish- ment and comfort of the Church against the Corruption of the flesh and the malice of Satan and of the world, to commit the same wholly unto Avi-iting." "The authority of the Holy Scripture, for which it ought to be beheved and obeyed, dependeth not upon the testimony of any man or church, but wholly upon God (who is trath itself) the Author thereof; and therefore it is to be received laecause it is the word of God."


Question: By  ichat  other  arguments  may  this  principle  he  proved  ?

Answer: As the Scriptures profess to be a rule complete for its end, so they have always been practicalh" found to be such by the true spiritual people of God in all ages. They teach a complete and harmonious system of doctrine. They furnish all necessary principles for the government of the private lives of Christians, in every relation, for the public worship of God, and for the administration of the affairs of his kingdom; and they repel all pretended traditions and priestly innovations. 10. In ivhat sense do Protestants affirm and Bomanists deny the perspicuity of Scripture ? Protestants do not affirm that the doctrines revealed in the Scriptures are level to man's powers of understanding. ^lany of them are confessedly beyond all understanding. Nor do they affirm that every part of Scripture can be certainly and perspicuously expounded, many of the prophesies being per- fectly enigmatical until explained by the event. But they do affirm that every essential article of faith and rule of practice is clearly revealed in Scripture, or may certainly be deduced therefrom. This much the least instructed Christian may learn at once; while, on the other hand, it is true, that with the advance of historical and critical knowledge, and by means of controversies, the Christian church is constantly making- progress in the accurate interpretation of Scripture, and in the comprehension in its integrity of the system therein taught. Protestants affirm and Romanists deny that private and unlearned Christians may safely be allowed to interpret Script- ure for themselves. 11. Hoio can tlie per sp)icuity of Scripture he proved from the fact that it is a laio and a message ? We saw (question 8) that Scripture is either complete or false, from its own professed design. We now prove its per- spicuity upon the same principle. It professes to be (1) a law to be obeyed; (2) a revelation of truth to be believed, to be received by us in both aspects upon the penalty of eternal 86 THE RULE OF FAITH AND PRACTICE. death. To suppose it not to be perspicuous, relatively to its design of commanding- and teaching, is to charge God with dealing with us in a spirit at once disingenuous and cruel.


Question: In  loliat  'passages  is  their  perspicuity  asserted?

Answer: Ps. xix. 7, 8; cxix. 105, 130; 2 Cor. iii. 14 ; 2 Pet. i. 18, 19; Hab. ii. 2; 2 Tim. iii. 15, 17.


Question: By  ivhat  other  arguraents  may  this  point  he  established  ?

Answer: 1st. The Scriptures are addressed immediately, either to all men promiscuously, or else to the Avhole body of believers as such.— Dent. vi. 4-9; Luke i. 3; Rom. i. 7; 1 Cor. i. 2; 2 Cor. i. 1 ; iv. 2 ; Gal. i. 2 ; Eph. i. 1 ; Phil. i. 1 ; Col. i. 2 ; James i. 1 ; 1 Peter i. 1 ; 2 Peter i. 1 ; 1 John ii. 12, 14; Jude i. 1 ; Ptev. i. 3, 4; ii. 7. The only exceptions are the epistles to Timothy and Titus. 2d. All Christians promiscuously are commanded to search the Scriptures. — 2 Tim. iii. 15, 17; Acts xvii. 11; John v. 39. 3d. Universal experience. We have the same evidence of the light-giving power of Scripture that we have of the same property in the sun. The argument to the contrary is an insult to the understanding of the whole world of Bible readers. 4th. The essential unity in faith and practice, in spite of all circumstantial differences, of all Christian communities of every age and nation, who draw their religion directly from the open Scriptures. 14. What ivas the third quality required to constitute the Script- ures the sufficient rule of faith and practice? Accessibility. It is self-evident that this is the pre-eminent characteristic of the Scriptures, in contrast to tradition, Avhich is in the custody of a corporation of priests, and to every otlier pretended rule whatsoever. The agency of the church in this matter is simply to give all currency to the word of God. 15. What is meant by saying that the Scriptures are the judge as ivdl as the rule in questions of faith ? " A rule is a standard of judgment; a judge is the expounder and applier of that rule to the decision of particular cases." The Protestant doctrine is — 1st. That the Scriptures are the only infallible rule of faith and practice. 2d. (1.) Negatively. That there is no body of men who are either qualified, or authorized, to interpret the Scriptures, or to apply their principles to the decision of particular ques- tions, in a sense binding upon the faith of their felloiu Christians. THE ROMISH DOCTRINE. 87 (2.) Positively. That Scripture is the only infallible voice in the church, and is to be interpreted, in its own light, and with the gracious help of the Holy Ghost, who is promised to every Christian (1 John ii. 20-27), by each individual for himself^ with the assistance, though not by the authority, of his fellow Christians. Creeds and confessions, as to form, bind only those who voluntarily profess them, and as to matter, they bind only so far as they affirm truly what the Bible teaches, and because the Bible does so teach. 16. What is the Romish doctrine as to the authoritij of the church as the in/aJUUe interpreter of the rule of faith and the authoritative judge of all controversies ? The Romish doctrine is that the church is absolutely infal- lible in all matters of Christian faith and practice, and the divinely authorized depository and interpreter of the rule of faith. Her office is not to convey new revelations from God to man, yet her inspiration renders her infallible in disseminating and interpreting the original revelation communicated through the apostles. The church, therefore, authoritatively determines — 1st. What is Scripture? 2d. What is genuine tradition? 3d. What is the true sense of Scripture and tradition, and what is the true application of that perfect rule to every particular question of belief or practice. This authority vests in the pope, when acting in his official capacity, and in the bishops as a body ; as when assembled in general council, or when giving universal consent to a decree of pope or council. — "Decrees of Council of Trent," Session iv. ; "Deus Theo.," N. 80, 81, 84, 93, 94, 95, 96. "Bellarraine," Lib. III., de eccles., cap. xiv., and Lib. IL, de council., cap. ii.


Question: By  ivhat  arguments  do  they  seek  to  estahlish  this  authority?

Answer: 1st. The promises of Christ, given, as they claim, to the apostles, and to their official successor, securing their infallibil- ity, and consequent authority. — Matt. xvi. 18; xviii. 18-20; Luke xxiv. 47-49; John xvi. 13; xx. 23. 2d. The conmiission given to the church as the teacher of the world. — ]Matt. xxviii. 19, 20; Luke x. 16, etc. 3d. The church is declared to be " the pillar and ground of the truth," and it is affirmed that " the gates of hell shall never prevail against her." 4th. To the church is granted power to bind and loose, and he that will not hear the church is to be treated as a heathen. Matt. xvi. 19; xviii. 15-18. 5th. The church is commanded to discriminate between 88 THE RULE OF FAITH AND PRACTICE. truth and error, and must consequently be qualified and au- thorized to do so. — 2 Thessalonians iii. 6; liomans xvi. 17; 2 John 10. 6th. From the necessity of the case, men need and crave an ever-living, visible, and cotemporaneous infallible Interpreter and Judge. 7th. From universal analogy every community among men has the living judge as well as the written law, and the one would be of no value without the other. 8th. This power is necessary to secure unity and univer- sality, which all acknowledge to be essential attributes of the true church. 18. By ivhai arguments may this claim of the Bomish church he shotvn to he ntterly haseless? 1st. A claim vesting in mortal men a power so momentous can be established only by tiie most clear and certain evidence, and the failure to produce snch converts the claim into a treason at once against God and the human race. 2d. Her evidence fails, because the promises of Christ to preserve his church from extinction and from error do none of them go the length of pledging infallibility^ The utmost promised is, that the true people of God shall never perish en- tirely from the earth, or be left to apostatize from the essentials of the faith. 3d. Her evidence fails, because these promises of Christ were addressed not to the officers of the church as such, but to the body of true believers. Compare John xx. 23 with Luke xxiv. 33, 47, 48, 49, and 1 John ii. 20, 27. 4th. Her evidence fails, because the church to Avhich the precious promises of the Scriptiu'es are pledged is not an ex- ternal, visible society, the authority of which is vested in the hands of a perpetual line of apostles. For — (1.) the word church (^£HHXT;dia) is a collective term, embracing the effectually called (^H?i?jr6i) or regenerated. — Rom. i. 7; viii. 28; 1 Cor. i. 2; Jude i. ; Rev. xvii. 14; also Rom. ix. 24; 1 Cor. vii. 18-24; Gal. i. 15; 2 Tim. i. 9; Heb. ix. 15; 1 Pet. ii. 9; v. 10; Eph. i. 18; 2 Pet. i. 10. (2.) The attributes ascribed to the church prove it to consist alone of the true, spiritual people of God as such. — Eph. v. 27; 1 Pet. ii. 5; John x. 27; Col. i. 18, 24. (3.) The epistles are addressed to the church, and in their salutations explain that phrase as equivalent to "the called," "the saints," "all true worshippers of God;" witness the salutations of 1st and 2d Corintiiians, Ephesians, Colossians, Ist and 2d Peter and Jude. The same attributes are ascribed to the members of the true church as such throughout the body of the Epistles. — 1 Cor. i. ROMISH DOCTRINE REFUTED. 89 30; iii. 16; vi. 11, 19; Epli. ii. 3-8, and 19-22; 1 Tlies. v. 4, 5; 2 Thes. ii. 13; Col. i. 21; ii. 10; 1 Pet. ii. 9. 5th. The inspired apostles have had no successors. (1.) There is no evidence that they had such in the New Testament. (2.) While provision was made for the regular perpetuation of the offices of presbj^ter and deacon (1 Tim. iii. 1-13), there are no directions given for the perpetuation of the apostolate. (3.) There is perfect silence concerning the continued exist- ence of any apostles in the church in the writings of the early centuries. Both the name and the thing ceased. (4.) No one ever claiming to be one of their successors have possessed the "sitrns of an apostle." — 2 Cor. xii. 12; 1 Cor. ix. 1; Gal. i. 1, 12; Acts i. 21, 22. 6th. This claim, as it rests upon the authority of the Pope, is utterly unscriptural, because the Pope is not known to Script- ure. As it rests upon the authority of the whole body of the bishops, expressed in their general consent, it is unscriptural for the reasons above shown, and it is, moreover, impracticable, since their imiversal judgment never has been and never can be impartially collected and pronounced. 7th. There can be no infallibility where there is not self- consistency. But as a matter of fact the Papal church has not been self-consistent in her teaching. (1.) She has taught dif- ferent doctrines in different sections and ages. (2.) She affirms the infallibility of the holy Scriptures, and at the same time teaches a system plainly and radically inconsistent with their manifest sense; witness the doctrines of the priesthood, the mass, penance, of Avorks, and of IMary worship. Therefore the Church of Rome hides the Scriptures from the people. 8th. If this Romish system be true then genuine spiritual re- ligion ought to flourish in her communion, and all the rest of the world ought to be a moral desert. The facts are notoriously the reverse. If, therefore, we admit that the Romish system is true, we subvert one of the principal evidences of Christianity itself, viz., the self-evidencing light and practical power of true religion, and the witness of the Holy Ghost. 19. By wliat direct arguments may tJie doctrine that the Script- ures are the final judge of controversies he established? That all Christians are to study the Scriptures for them- selves, and that in all questions as to God's revealed will the appeal is to the Scriptures alone, is proved by the following facts : 1st. Scripture is perspicuous, see above, questions 11-13. 2d. Scripture is addressed to all Christians as such, see above, question 13. 90 THE RULE OF FAITH AND PRACTICE. 3d. All Christians ai'e commanded to search the Scriptures, and by them to judg-e all doctrines and all professed teacliers. — John V. 39; Acts xvii. 11; Gal. i. 8; 2 Cor. iv. 2; 1 Thess. v. 21; 1 John iv. 1, 2. 4th. The promise of the Holy Spirit, the author and inter- preter of Scripture, is to all Christians as such. Compare John XX. 23 with Luke xxiv. 47-49; 1 John ii. 20, 27; Eom. viii. 9; 1 Cor. iii. 16, 17. 5th. Religion is essentially a personal matter. Each Chris- tian must know and believe the truth explicitly for himself, on the direct ground of its own moral and spiritual evidence, and not on the mere ground of blind authority. Otherwise faith could not be a moral act, nor could it "purify the heart." Faith derives its sanctifying power from the truth which it immedi- ately ap})rehends on its own experimental evidence. — John xvii. 17, 19; James i. 18; 1 Pet. i. 22. 20. What is the objection which the Romanists make to this doc- trine, on the ground that tJw church is our only authority for believing that the Scriptures are the loord of God ? Their objection is, that as we receive the Scriptures as the word of God only on the authoritative testimony of the church, our faith in the Scriptures is oidy another form of our faith in the church, and the authority of the church, being the founda- tion of that of Scripture, must of course be held paramount. This is absurd, for two reasons — 1st. The assumed fact is false. The evidence upon which we receive Scripture as the word of God is not the authority of the chiu'ch, but — (1.) God did speak by the apostles and prophets, as is evident («) from the nature of their doctrine, (Ji) from their miracles, (c) their prophecies, {d) our personal experience and observation of the power of the truth. (2.) These very writings which we possess were written by the apostles, etc., as is evident, («) from internal evidence, (/>) from historical testimony ren- dered by all competent cotemj^oraneous witnesses in the church or out of it. 2d. Even if the fact assumed Avas true, viz., that we knoAv the Scriptures to be from God, on the authority of the church's testimony alone, the conclusion they seek to deduce from it would be ahsiard. The witness who proves the identity or pri- mogeniture of a prince does not thereby acqitire a right to govern the kingdom, or even to interpret the will of the prince. 21. Hoio is the argument for the necessity of a visible judge, derived from the diversities of sects and doctrines among Protestants, to be answered? ROMISH DOCTRINE REFUTED. 91 1st. We do not pretend that the private judgment of Pro- testants is infallible, but only that when exercised in an humble, believing spirit, it always leads to a competent knowledge of essential truth. 2d. The term Protestant is simply negative, and is assumed by many infidels who protest as much against the Scriptures as they do against Rome. But Bible Protestants, among all their circumstantial differences, are, to a wonderful degree, agreed upon the essentials of faith and practice. Witness their "^ hj^mns and devotional literature. (-^^^ 3d. The diversity that does actually exist arises from failure" j^^j^--' in applying faithfully the Protestant principles for which we ",,'■'; contend. Alen do not simply and without prejudice take their creed from the Bible. 4th. The Catholic church, in her last and most authoritative '^a'^'^ utterance through the Council of Trent, has proved herself a ;>^»v^" most indefinite judge. Her doctrinal decisions need an infal- " i ^^ lible interpreter infinitely more than the Scriptures. 22. How may it he sJioivn that the Romanist theory, as tcell as the Protestant, necessarily throws upon the people the obligation of private judgment ? Is there a God? Has he revealed himself? Plas he estab- lished a church? Is that church an infallible teacher? Is private judgment a blind leader? Which of all pretended churches is the true one ? Every one of these questions evi- dently must be settled in the private judgment of the inquirer, before he can, rationally or irrationally, give up his private judgment to the direction of the self-asserting church. Tlius of necessity Romanists appeal to the Scriptures to prove that the Scriptures can not be understood, and address arguments to the private judgment of men to prove that private judgment is incompetent; thus basing an argument upon that which it is the object of the argument to prove is baseless. 23. Hoio may it he proved that the peopile are far more compe- tent to discover what the Bible teaches than to decide, by the marJcs insisted iqjon by the Romanists, ivhicli is the trite church ? The Romanists, of necessity, set forth certain marks by which the true church is to be discriminated from all counter- feits. These are (1.) Unity (through subjection to one visible head, the Pope); (2.) Holiness; (3.) Catholicity; (4.) Apostol- icity, (involving an uninterrupted succession from the apostles of canonically ordained bishops.) — "Cat. of Council of Trent," Part I., Cap. 10. Now, the comprehension and intelligent appli- cation of these marks involve a great amoiint of learning and 92 THE RULE OF FAITH AND PRACTICE. intelligent capacity npon the part of the inqnirer. He might as easily prove himself to be descended from Noah by an unbro- ken series of legitimate marriages, as establish the right of Rome to the last mark. Yet he can not rationally give np the right of studying the Bible for himself until that point is made clear. Surely the Scriptures, with their self-evidencing spiritual power, make less exhaustive demands upon the resources of private judgment. EoMAN Catholic Doctkine as to the Pkivate Inteepketation of SCEIPTUKE, and as TO TkADITION, AND AS TO THE iNFAIiLIBLLITX OF THE Pope. 1st. As TO THE Intekpbetation OF ScKiPTUBE. — "Decrees of Council of D-en/," Sess. iv. — "Moreover the same sacred and holy Synod . ordains and declares, that the said old and vnlgate edition, which, by the lengthened nsage of so many ages, has been approved of in the Church, be, in public lectures, disputations, sermons, and expositions, held as authentic; and that no one is to dare or presume to reject it under any pretext whatever. "Furthermore, in order to restrain petulant spirits, it decrees that no one, relying on his own skill, shall, in matters of faith and of morals pertaining to the edification of Christian doctrine, — wresting the sacred Scriptiire to his own senses, presume to interpret the said sacred Script- ure contrary to that sense which holy mother Church — whose it is to judge of the true sense and interpretation of the Holy Scriptures — hath held and doth hold; or even contrary to the nnanimous consent of the Fathers; even though such interpretations were never (intended) to be at any time published. " "jDof/mah'c Becrees of (lie Vatican Council," ch. ii. — "And as the things which the holy Synod of Trent decreed for the good of souls concern- ing the interpretation of Divine Scripture, in order to curb rebellious spirits, have been -svrongly explained by some, we, renewing the said decree, declare this to be their sense, that, in matters of faith and morals, appertaining to the building uj) of Christian doctrine, that is to be held as the true sense of Holy Scripture which our holy mother Church hath held and holds, to whom it belongs to judge of the true sense of the Holy Scripture; and therefore that it is permitted to no one to interpret the sacred Scripture contrary to this sense, nor, likewise contrary to the unanimous consent of the Fathers." 2d. As to Tbadition. — ''Prcf. Fidei Tridenfince" (a, d. 156i) ii. and iii. "I most steadfastly admit and embrace apostolic and ecclesiastic tradi- tions, and all other observances and constitutions of the same Church. I also admit the Holy Scriptures, according to that sense which our holy mother Church has held and does hold, to which it belongs to judge of the true sense and interpretation of the Scriptures; neither will I ever take and interpret them otherwise than according to the unanimous consent of the Fathers. " " Council of Trent " Sess. iv. — "And seeing clearly that this truth and discipline are contained in the written books, and the unwritten tradi- tions which, received by the apostles from the mouth of Christ himself, or from tlie apostles themselves the Holy Ghost dictating, have come down even unto us transmitted as it were from hand to hand." 3d. As TO THE ABSOLrTE Authokity OF THE PoPE. — '' Dogmatic Bed- DECREES OF THE VATICAN COUNCIL. 93 sion!!, of the Valicnn Council,'''' chai^. iii. — " Hence we teach and declare that by the appointment of our Lord . . the power of jurisdiction of the Roman Pontiff is immediate, to which all, of wliatever rite and dignity, both pastors and faithful, both individually and collectively, are bound, by their duty of hierarchical subordination and true obedience, to submit not only in matters which belong to faith and morals, but also in those that appertain to the discipHne and government of the Church througlioiit the world. . . We farther teach and declare that he is tlie supreme judge of the faithful, and that in all causes, the decision of which belongs to the Church, recourse may be had to his tribunal, and that none may reopen the judgment of the Apostolic See, than whose authority there is no greater, nor can any lawfully review his judgment. Wherefore they err from the right course who assert that it is lawful to appeal from the judgments of the Roman P(mtifF to an cecumenical council, as to an authority higher than that of the Roman Pontilf. " 4th. CONCEENING THE ABSOLUTE iNFAIiLIBELITY OF THE PoPE AS THE Teacheb of THE UNIVERSAL Chuech. — ^'Dogmatic Decreeii of tlie Vaticmi Council," Chap. iv. — "Therefore faithfully adhering to the tradition received fi-om the beginning of the Christian faith, for the glory of God our Saviour, the exaltation of the Catholic religion, and the salvation of Christian people, the saci'ed Council approving, we teach and define that it is a dogma divinely revealed: That the Roman Pontiff when he speaks ex cathedra, that is, when in discharge of the office of pastor and doctor of aU Christians, by virtue of his suj^reme Apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine regarding faith or morals to be held by the universal Church, by the divine as.sistance i^romised to him in blessed Peter, is possessed of the infallibility with which the divine Redeemer willed that his Church should be endowed for defining doctrine according to faith and morals; and that therefore such definitions of the Roman Pontiff are irreformable of themselves, and not from the consent of the Church. But if any one — which may God avert — presume to contradict this our definition: let him be anathema." Cardinal Manning in his ^^ Vatican Council" says, "In this definition there are six jDoints to be noted : "1st. It defines the meaning of the well-known phrase loquens ex cathedra; that is, speaking from the Seat, or jilace, or with the authority of the supreme teacher of all Christians, and binding the assent of the universal Church. "2d. The subject matter of the infallible teaching, namely, the doc- trine of faith and morals. "3d. The efficient cause of infallibility, that is, the divine assistance jDromised to Peter, and in Peter to his successors. "4:th. The act to which this divine assistance is attached, the defining of doctrines of faith and morals. "5th. The extension of this infallible authority to the limits of the doctrinal office of the Church. " 6th. The dogmatic value of the definitions ex cathedra, namely that they are in themselves irreformable, because in themselves infallible, and not because the Church, or any part or member of the Church, should assent to them. " ^^ Dogmatic Decrees of Vatican Council," Ch. iv.— "For the Holy Spirit was not promised to the successors of Peter, that by his revelation they might make known new doctrine; but that by his assistance they might inviolably keep and faithfully expound the revelation or deposit of faith deUvered through the Apostles."


Question: What  loas  the  origin  of  the  3Iiddle  or  Semipelagian  system  ?

Answer: In the mean time, while the Pelagian controversy was at its height, John Cassian, of Syrian extraction and educated in the Eastern Church, having removed to Marseilles, in France, for the purpose of advancing the interests of monkery in that region, began to give publicity to a scheme of doctrine occu- pying a middle position between the systems of Augustine and Pelagius. This system, whose advocates were called JMassilians from the residence of their chief, and afterward Semipelagians by the Schoolmen, is in its essential principles one with that system which is now denominated Arminianism, a statement of which will be given in a subsequent part of this chapter. Faustus, bishop of Riez, in France, from a. d. 427 to a. d. 480, was one of the most distinguished and successful advocates of this doctrine, which was permanently accepted by the Eastern Church, and for a time was widely disseminated throughout the western also, until it was condemned by the Synods of Orange and Valence, a. d. 529. 7. What is the relation of Augustinianism to Calvinism arid of Semi^'idagianism to Arminianism ? After this time Augustinianism became the recognized or- thodoxy of the Western Church, and the name of no other uninspired man exerts such imiversal influence among Papists and Protestants alike. If any liuman name ought to be used to designate a system of divinely revealed truth, the phrase * The doctrine of Augustine does not by any means involve the conclusion that the elect are "few" or "a small number." DURING THE SCHOLASTIC AGE. 99 Augristinianism as opposed to Pelagiamsm properly designates all those elements of faith which the whole world of Evangel- ical Christians hold in common. On the other hand Augnstin- ianism as opposed to Semipelagianism properly designates that system commonly called Calvinism — while Cassianisia would be the proper historical designation of that Middle or Semipe- lagian Scheme now commonly styled Arminianism. 8. Hotv ivere parties divided icitli respect to tJiese great systems among the Schoolmen, and how are tliey in the modern Papal Church ? After the lapse of the dark ages, during which all active speculation slumbered, the great Thomas Aquinas, an Italian by birth, a. d. 1224, and a monk of the order of St. Dominic, Doctor Angelicus, advocated with consummate ability the Au- gustinian sj^stem of theology in that cumbrous and artificial manner which characterized the Schoolmen. John Duns Sco- tus, a native of Britain, a. d. 1265, a monk of the order of St. Francis, Doctor Subtilis, was in that age the ablest advocate of the system then styled Semipelagian. The controversies then revived were perpetuated for many ages, the Dominicans and the Thomists in general advocating unconditional election and efficacious grace, and the Franciscans and the Scotists in general advocating conditional election and the inalienable power of the human will to co-operate with or to resist divine grace. The same disputes under various party names continue to agitate the Romish Church since the Reformation, although the genius of her ritualistic system, and the predominance of the Jesuits in her councils, have seciu'ed within her bounds the almost universal prevalence of Semipelagianism. The general Council, commenced at Trent, a. d. 1546, at- tempted to form a non-committal Creed that Avould satisfy the adherents of both systems. Accordingly the Dominicans and Franciscans have both claimed that their respective views were sanctioned by that Synod. The truth is that while the general and indefinite statements of doctrine to be found among its canons are often Augustinian in form, the more detailed and accurate explanations which follow these are uniformly Semi- pelagian. — Principal Cunningham's "Historical Theology," vol. 1, pp. 483-495. The order of the Jesuits, founded by Ignatius Loyola, a. d. 1541, has always been identified with Semipelagian Theology. Lewis ]\Iolina, a Spanish Jesuit, a. d. 1588, the inventor of tiie distinction denoted by the term "Scientia jMedia," attained to such distinction as its advocate, that its adherents in the Papal Church have been for ages styled Molinists. In 1638 Janse- 100 COMPARISON OF SYSTEMS. nius, Bishop of Ypres in the Netherlands died leaving behind him his great Avork, Angnstinns, wherein he clearly unfolded and established by copious extracts tlie true theological system of Augustine. This book occasioned very wide-spread conten- tions, was ferociously opposed by the Jesuits, and condemned by the Bulls of Popes Innocent X. and Alexander VII., a. d. 1653 and 1656 — which last were followed in 1713 by the more celebrated Bull '"'' imigenitus'" of Clement XL, condemning the New Testament Commentary of Qaesnel. The Augustinians in that Church were subsequently called Jansenists, and had their principal seat in Holland and Belgium and at Port Eoyal near Paris. They have numbered among them some very illus- trious names, as Tillemont, Arnauld, Nicole, Pascal, and Quesnel. These controversies between the Dominicans and Molinists, the Jansenists and Jesuits, have continued even to our own time, although at present Semipelagianism shares with Jesuitism in its almost unlimited sway in the Papal Church, which has def- initely triumphed in the Vatican Council, 1870. 9. What is the position of the Lidheran Church ivith relation to these great systems ? Luther, a monk of the order of Augustine, and an earnest disciple of that father, taught a system of faith agreeing in spirit and in all essential points with that afterwards more sys- tematically developed by Calvin. The only important point in which he differed from the common consensus of the Calvinistic Churches related to the literal physical presence of the entire person of Christ in, with, and under the elements in the Eucharist. With these opinions of Luther Melanclithon appears to have agreed at the time he published the first edition of his " Loci Communes." His opinions however as to the freedom of man and the sovereignty of divine grace were subsequently grad- ually modified. After the death of Luther, at the Leipsic Con- ference in 1548, he explicitly declared his agreement with the Si/nergists, who maintain that in the regenerating act the hu- man will co-operates with divine grace. ]\Ielanchthon, on the other hand, held a view of the relation of the sign to tlie grace signified thereby in the Sacraments, much more nearly con- forming to opinions of the disciples of Zwingle and Calvin than generally prevailed in his own Church. His position on both these points gave great offence to the Old Lutherans, and occasioned protracted and bitter controversies. Finally, the Old or Strict Lutheran party prevailed over their antago- nists, and their views received a complete scientific statement in the " Formula Concordiae" published 1580. Although this re- markable document never attained a position by the side of THE LUTHERAN SYSTEM. 101 the Augsburg Confession and Apology as the universally rec- ognized Confession of the Lutheran Churches, it may justly be taken as the best available witness as to what strictly Lutheran theology when developed into a complete system really is. The Characteristics of Lutheran theology as contrasted with that of the Reformed Churches may be briefly stated under the Ibllowing heads : 1st. As to Theology proper and Christology the only points in which it differs from Calvinism are the following: (1.) As to the divine attributes of sovereign foreordination, they hold that as far as it is concerned with the actions of moral agents it is limited to those actions which are morally good, while it sustains no determining relation to those which are bad. (jo^ foreknoioa all events of whatever kind; he foreor- dains all the actions of necessary agents, and the good actions of free agents — but nothing else. (2.) As to Christology, they hold that in virtue of the hypo- statical union the human element of Christ's person partakes with the divine in at least some of its peculiar attributes. Thus his human soul shares in the omniscience and omnipo-j tehee of his divinity, and his body' in its omnipresence, and/ together they have the power of giving life to the truly believW ing recipient of the sacrament. 2d. As to Anthropology", they hold views identical with those held by the staunchest advocates of the Reformed Theology — as for instance the antecedent and immediate imputation of Adam's public sin ; the total moral depravity of all his descend- ants from birth and by nature, and their absolute inability to do aright in their own strength any thing which pertains to their relation to God. 3d. As to the great central elements of Soteriology, they agree with the Reformed with great exactness as to the nature and necessity of the expiatory work of Christ; as to forensic justification through the imputation to the believer of both the active and passive obedience of Christ; as to the nature and office of justifying faith ; as to the sole agency of divine grace in the regeneration of the sinner, with which, in the first in- stance, the dead soul is unable to co-operate ; as to God's eter- nal and sovereign election of believers in Christ, not because of any thing foreseen in them, but because of his own gracious will — and consequently as to the fact that the salvation of every soul really saved is to be attributed purely and solely to the grace of God, and not in any degree to the co-operating will or merit of the man himself At the same time they teach, with obvious logical incon- sistency, that the grace of the gospel is in divine intention 102 COMPARISON OF SYSTEMS. absolutely universal. Christ died equally and in the same sense for all men. He gives grace alike to all men. Those who are lost are lost because they resist the grace. Those Avho are saved owe their salvation simply to the grace they have in common with the lost — to the very same grace — not to a greater degree of grace nor to a less degree of sin — not to their own improvement of grace, but simply to the grace itself. According to them God sovereignly elects all those who are saved, but he does not sovereignly pass over those who are lost. He gives the same grace to all men, and the difference is determined by the persistent resistance of those who are lost. The grand distinction of Lutheranism however relates to their doctrine of the Eucharist. They hold to the real phys- ical presence of the Lord in the Eucharist, in, with, and under the elements, and that the grace signified and conveyed by the sacraments is necessary to salvation, and conveyed ordi- narily by no other means. Hence the theology and church life of the strict Lutherans centre in the sacraments. They differ from the high sacramental party in the Episcopal Church chiefly in the fact that they ignore the dogma of apostolical succession, and the traditions of the early church. 10. Inio icliat tivo great parties has the Protestant loorld always been divided? The whole Protestant world from the time of the Reforma- tion has been divided into two great families of churches, clas- sified severally as Lutheran, or those whose character was derived from Luther and ]\Ielanchth.on ; and as Reformed, or those who have received the characteristic impress of Calvin. The Lutheran family of churches comprises ail- of those Prot- estants of Germauy, of Hungary, and the Baltic provinces of Russia, who adhere to the Augsburg Confession, together with the national churches of Denmark and of Norway and Sweden, and the large denomination of the name in America. These are estimated as amounting to a population of about twenty- five millions of pure Lutherans, Avhile the Evangelical Church of Prussia, which was formed of a political union of the adhe- rents of the two Confessions, embraces probably eleven millions and a half Their Symbolical Books are the Augsburg Con- fession and Apology, the Articles of Smalcald, Luther's Larger and Smaller Catechism, and, as received by the Stricter party, the Formula Concordiae. The Calvtnistic or Reformed churches embrace, in the strict usage of the term, all those Protestant Churches which derive their Theology from Geneva; and among these, because of obvious qualifying conditions, the Episcopal Churches of England, Ireland, and America form a subdivision UNITARIANISM. 103 by themselves; and the Wesleyan Methodists, who are usually classed among the Keformed because they were historically developed from that stock, are even yet more distinctly than the parent church of England removed from the normal type of the general class. In a general sense, however, this class comprises all those churches of Germany which subscribe to the Heidelburg Catechism, the churches of Switzerland, France, Holland, England, and Scotland, the Independents and Baptists of England and America, and the various branches of the Pres- byterian Church in England, Ireland, and America. These em- brace about eight millions German Eeformed; two millions in the Reformed church of Hungary; twelve millions and a half Episcopalians ; Presbyterians, six millions ; Methodists, three millions and a half; Baptists, four millions and a half; and Independents, one million and a half; — in all about thirty-eight millions. The principal confessions of the Reformed Church are the Gallic, Belgic, 2d Helvetic, and Scotch Confessions; the Heidel- burg Catechism ; the Thirty-nine Articles of the Church of Eng- land ; the Canons of the Synod of Dort, and the Confession and Catechisms of the Westminster Assembly. 11. State the Origin of the Unitarian Hereby. In the early church the Ebionites, a Jewish-Gnostic Chris- tian sect, were the only representatives of. those in modern times called Socinians. A party among them were called Elkesaites. Their ideas, with special modifications, are found expressed in the "Clementine Homilies," written about a. d. 150 in Ori- ental Syi-ia. The most distinguished humanitarians in the early church were the two Theodotuses of Rome, both laymen, Arte- mon (flSO) and Paul of Samosata, bishop of Antioch (2(30-270), deposed by a Council held 269. j\Iost of these admitted the supernatural birth of Christ, but maintained that he was a mere man, honored by a special divine influence. They admitted an apotheosis or relative deification of Christ consequent upon his earthly achievements. (Dr. E. De Pressense, "Early Years of Christianity," Part 3, bk. 1, chs. 3 and 5). Cerinthus, who lived during the last of the first and the first of the second century, held that Jesus was a mere man born of Mary and Joseph, that the Christ or Logos came down upon him in the shape of a dove at his baptism, when he was raised to the dignity of the son of God, and wrought miracles, etc. The Logos left the man Jesus to sufi'er alone at his cruci- fixion. The resurrection also was denied. They were succeeded by the Arians in the fourth century. During the Middle Ages there remained no party within the lOJ: COMPARISON OF SYSTEMS. church that openly denied the supreme divinity of our Lord. In modern times Unitarianism revived at the period of the Reformation through tlie agency of Lsehus Socinus of Italy, It was carried by him into Switzerland and existed there as a doctrine professed by a few conspicuous heretics from 1525 to 1560. The most prominent of its professors were the Socini, Servetus, and Ochino. It existed as an organized church at Racow in Poland, where the exiled heretics found a refuge from 1539 to 1658, when the Socinians were driven out of Poland by the Jesuits, and passing into Holland became ab- sorbed in the Remonstrant or Arminian Churches. In 1609 Schmetz drew up from materials afforded by the teaching of Faustus Socinus, the nephew of Laslius, and of J. Crellius, the Racovian Catechism, which is the standard of Socinianism (see Ree's translation, 1818.) After their dispersion, Andrew Wisso- watius and others collected the most important writings of their leading theologians under the title "Bibliotheca Fratrum Polo- norum." Socinianism Avas developed by these writers with consummate ability, .and crystalized into its most perfect form, as a logical system. It is purely Unitarian in its theology — Hmnanitarian in its Christology, Pelagian in its Anthrojjohgi/ — and its Soteriology was developed in perfect logical and ethical consistency with those elements. A statement of its charac- teristic positions will be found below. It reappeared again as a doctrine held by a few isolated men in England in the seventeenth century. During tlie eighteenth century a number of degenerate Presbyterian Churches in Eng- land lapsed into Socinianism, and towards the end of the same century a larger number of Congregational Churches in Eastern Massachusetts followed their example, and these together con- stitute the foundation of the modern Unitarian Denomination. " Its last form is a modification of the old Socinianism formed under the pressure of evangelical religion on the one hand, and of rationalistic criticism on the other. Priestley, Channing, and J. Martineau are the examples of the successive phases of Modern Unitarianism. Priestley, of the old Socinian- ism, building itself upon a sensational philosophy; Channing, of an attempt to gain a large development of the spiritual element; Martineau, of the el.evation of view induced by the phil()so])hy of Cousin, and the introduction of the idea of his- torical progress in religious ideas." — "Farrar's Crit. Hist, of Free Thought," Bampton Lecture, 1862. 12. At loliat date and under what circumstances did modern Arminianism arise ? James Arminius, professor of theology in the university of THE REMONSTRANTS. 105 Leyden from 1G02 until his death in 1609, althongh a minis- ter of the Calvinistic Church of Holland, at first secretly, and afterwards more openly, advocated that scheme of theological opinion which has ever subsequently been designated by his name. These views were rapidly diffused, and at the same time strongly opposed by the principal men in the church. His disciples, consequently, about a year after his death formed themselves into an organized party, and in that capacity pre- sented a Bemonstrance to the States of Holland and AVest Fries- land, praying to be allowed to hold their places in the church without being subjected by the ecclesiastical courts to vexatious examinations as to their orthodoxy. From the fact that the ut- terance of this Remonstrance was their first combined act as a party, they were afterwards known in history as Remonstrants. Soon after this the Remonstrants, for the sake of defining their position, presented to the authorities five Articles express- ing their belief on the subject of Predestination and Grace. This is the origin of the famous "Five Points" in the controversy between Calvinism and Arminianism. Very soon however the controversy took a much wider range, and the Arminians were forced by logical consistency to teach radically erroneous views with respect to the nature of sin, original sin, imputation, the nature of the Atonement, and Justification by faith. Some of their later writers carried the rationalistic spirit inherent in their system to its legitimate results in a hardly qualified Pelagianism, and some were even suspected of Socinianism. As all other means had failed to silence the innovators, the States General called together a General Synod at Dort in Holland, which held its sessions in the year 1618-1619. It consisted of pastors, elders, and theological professors from the churches of Flolland, and depiities from the churches of Eng- land, Scotland, Hesse, Bremen, the Palatinate and Switzerland: the promised attendance of delegates from the French churches being prevented by an interdict of their king. The foreign delegates present were nineteen Presbyterians from Reformed churches on the Continent^ and one from Scotland, and four Episcopalians from the church of England headed by the bisliop of Llandaflf. Tliis Synod unanimously condemned the doctrines of the Arminians, and in their Articles confirmed the common Calvinistic faith of tlie Reformed churches. The most distin- guished Remonstrant Theologians who succeeded Arminius were Episcopius, Ciu'celkeus, Limborch, Le Clerc, Wetstein, and the illustrious jurisconsult Grotius. The denomination of Methodists in Great Britain and Amer- ica is the only large Protestant body in the world with an avowedly Arminian Creed. Their Arminianism, however, as ^ 106 COMPARISON OF SYSTEMS. presented by their standard writer, Richard Watson, an incom- parably more competent theologian than Wesley, is far less removed from the Calvinism of the Westminster Assembly than the system of the later Remonstrants, and should always be designated by the qualified phrase " Evangelical Arminian- ism." In the hands of Watson the Anthropology and Soteri- ology of Arminianism are in a general sense nearly assimilated to the corresponding provinces of Lutheranism, and of the Cal- vinism of Baxter, and of the French School of the seventeenth century. 13. Give an outline of the main positions of the Sodnian System. Theology and Christology. ^^ 1st. Divine Unity. (a.) This iTmty inconsistent with any personal distinctions in the Godhead. (l).) Christ Jsajnere man. (c.) The Holy Ghost is an impersonal divine influence. 2d. Divine Attributes. (a.) There is no principle of vindicatory justice in God. Nothing to prevent his acceptance of sinners on the simple ground of repentance. {h.) Future contingent events are essentially unknowable. The foreknowledge of God does not extend to such events. Anthropology. (a.) Man was created without positive moral character. The " image of God " in which man was said to be created did not include holiness. (&.) Adam in eating the forbidden fruit committed actual sin, and thereby incurred the divine displeasure, but he retained nevertheless the same moral nature and tendencies with which he was created, and he transmitted these intact to his posterity. (r.) The guilt of Adam's sin is not imputed. (c/.) Man is now as able by nature to discharge all his obli- gations as he ever was. The circumstances under which man's character is now formed are more unfavorable than in Adam's case, and therefore man is weak. But God is infinitely mer- ciful; and obligation is graded by abihty. I\Ian was created naturally mortal and would have died had he sinned or not. SOTERIOLOGY. The great object of Christ's mission Avas to teach and to give assurance with respect to those truths concerning which the conclusions of mere human reason are problematical. This he does both by doctrine and example. 1st. Christ did not execute the office of priest upon earth; but only in heaven, and there in a very indefinite sense. THE SOCINIAN SYSTEM. 107 2d. The main office of Clirist was prophetical. He taught a new law. Gave an example of a holy life. Taught the per- sonality of God. And illustrated the doctrine of a future life by his own resiu'rection. od. His death was necessary only as a condition unavoid- ably prerequisite to his resurrection. It was also designed to make a moral impression upon sinners, disposing them to re- pentance on account of sin, and assuring them of the clemency of God. No propitiation of divine justice was necessary, nor would it be possible by means of vicarious suffering. ESCATOLOGY. 1st. In the intermediate period between death and the res- urrection the soul remains unconscious. 2d. "For it is'evident from the authorities cited, that they (the older Socinians), equally with others, constantly maintain that there will be a resurrection both of the just and of the unjust, and that the latter shall be consigned to everlasting punishment, but the former admitted to everlasting life." — B. Wissowatius. "The doctrine of the proper eternity of hell torments is rejected by most Unitarians of the present day (1818), as in tlieir opinion wholly irreconcilable Avith the divine goodness, and unwarranted by the Scriptures. In reference to the future fate of the wicked, some hold that after the resurrection they will be annihilated or consigned to ' everlasting destruction ' in the literal sense of the words: but most have received the doctrine of universal restoration, which maintains that all men, however depraved their characters may have been in this life, will, by a corrective discipline, suited in the measure of its severity to the nature of each particular case, be brought ulti- mately to goodness and consequently to happiness." — Rees's " Kacovian Catechism," pp. 367, "dQ^. ECCLESIOLOGY. 1st. The church is simply a voluntary society. Its object mutual improvement. Its common bond similarity of senti- ments and pursuits. Its rule is human reason. 2d. The Sacraments are simply commemorative and teach- ing ordinances. 14. Give an outline of the main features of the Arniinian System. Divine Attributes. 1st. They admit that vindicatory justice is,, a. divine at- tribute, but hold that it is relaxable, rather optional than essential, ratFer belonging to administrative policy than to necessary principle. 2d. They admit that God foreknows all events without ex- 108 COMPARISON OF SYSTEMS. ception. They invented the distinction expressed by the term Scierdia 3Iedia to explain God's certain foreknowledge of future events, the futurition of which remain undetermined by his will, or any other antecedent cause. 3d. They deny that God's foreordination extends to the voli- tions of free agents, and hold that the eternal election of men to salvation is not absolute, but conditioned upon foreseen faith and obedience. Anthropology. 1st. Moral character can not be created but is determined only by previous self-decision. 2d. Both liberty and I'esponsibility necessarily involve pos- session of power to the contrary. 3d. They usually deny the imputation of the guilt of Adam's first sin. 4tli. The strict Arminians deny total depravity, and admit only the moral enfeeblement of nature. Arminius and Wesley were more orthodox but less self-consistent. 5th. They deny that man has ability to originate holy action or to carry it on in his own unassisted strength — but affirm that every man has power to co-operate with, or to resist ^'■common grace.'" That which alone distinguishes the saint from the sin- ner is his own use or abuse of grace. 6th. They regard gracious influence as rather moral and suasory than as a direct and effectual exertion of the new cre- ative energy of God. 7th. They maintain the liability of the saint at every stage of his earthl}^ career to fall from grace. SOTERIOLOGY. 1st. They admit that Christ made a vicarious off'ering of himself in place of sinful men, and yet deny that he suffered either the literal penalty of the law, or a full equivalent for it, and maintain that his sufferings were graciously accepted as a substitute for the penalty. 2d. They hold that not only with respect to its sufficiency and adaptation, but also in the intention of the Father in giv- ing the Son, and of the Son in dying, Christ died in the same sense for all men alike. 3d. That the acceptance of Christ's satisfaction in the place of the infliction of the penalty on sinners in person involves a relaxation of the divine law. 4th. That Christ's satisfaction enables God in consistency with his character, and the interests of his general government, to offer salvation on easier terms. The gospel hence is a new law, demanding faith and evangelical obedience in the stead of the original demand of perfect obedience. THE CALVINISTIC SYSTEM. 109 5th. Hence Christ's work does not actually save any, but makes the salvation of all men possible — removes leg-al obsta- cles out of the way — does not secure faith but makes salvation available on the condition of faith. 6th. Sufficient influences of the Holy Spirit, and sufficient opportunities and means of grace are granted to all men. 7th. It is possible for and obligatory upon all men in this life to attain to evangelical perfection — which is explained as a being perfectly sincere — a being animated by perfect love — and a doing all that is required of us under the gospel dispensation. 8th. With respect to the heathen some have held that in some way or other the gospel is virtually, if not in form, preached to all men. Others have held that in the future world there are three conditions corresponding to the three great classes of men as they stand related to the gospel in this world — the Status Credentium; the Status Incredulorum; the Status Ignorantium. 15. Give 'a brief outline of the main features of the Calvinistic System. • ^ ~'** Theology. 1st. God is an absolute sovereign, infinitely wise, righteous, benevolent, and powerful, determining from eternity the cer- tain futurition of all events of every class according to the counsel of his own will. 2d. Vindicatory Justice is an essential and immutable per- fection of the divine nature demanding the full punishment of all sin, the exercise of which can not be relaxed or denied by the divine will. Christology. The Mediator is one single, eternal, divine person, at once very God, and very man. In the unity of the Theanthropic person the two natures remain pin-e and unmixed, and retain each its separate and incommunicable attributes distinct. The personality is that of the eternal and unchangeable Logos. The hmnan nature is impersonal. All mediatorial actions in- volve the concurrent exercise of the energies of both natures according to their several properties in the unity of the single person. Anthropology. 1st. God created man by an immediate fiat of omnipotence and in a condition of physical, intellectual, and moral fault- lessness, with a positively formed moral character. 2d. The guilt of Adam's public sin is by a judicial act of God immediately charged to the account of each of his de- 110 COMPARISON OF SYSTEMS. scendants from the moment he begins to exist antecedently to any act of his own. 3d. Hence men come into existence in a condition of con- demnation deprived of those influences of the Holy Spirit npon which their moral and spiritual life depends. 4th. Hence they come into moral agency deprived of that original righteousness which belonged to human nature as created in Adam, and with an antecedent prevailing tendency in their nature to sin, which tendency in them is of the nature of sin, and worthy of punishment. 5th. jNIan's nature since the fall retains its constitutional faculties of reason, conscience, and free-will, and hence man continues a responsible moral agent, but he is nevertheless spiritually dead, and totally averse to spiritual good, and abso- lutely unable to change his own heart, or adequately to dis- charge 9,x\j of those duties which spring out of his relation to God. SOTERIOLOGY. 1st. The salvation of man is absolutely of grace. God was free in consistency with the infinite perfections of liis nature to save none, few, many, or all, according to his sovereign good pleasure. 2d. Christ acted as Mediator in pursuance of an eternal cov- enant formed between the Father and the Son, according to which he was put in the law-place of his own elect people as their personal substitute, and as such by his obedience and suffering he discharged all the obligations growing out of their federal relations to law — by his sufferings vicariously endurnig their penal debt — by his obedience vicariously discharging those covenant demands, upon which their eternal well-being was suspended — thus fulfilling the requirements of the law, satisfying the justice of God, and securing the eternal salvation of those for Avhom he died. 3d. Hence, by his death he purchased the saving influences of the Holy Spirit for all for whom he died. And the Holy Spirit infallibly applies the redemption purchased by Christ to all for whom he intended it, in the precise time and under the precise conditions predetermined in the eternal Covenant of Grace — and he does this by the immediate and intrinsically efficacious exercise of his power, operating directly within them, and in the exercises of their renewed nature bringing them to act faith and repentance and all gracious obedience. 4th. Justification is a judicial act of God, whereby imputing to us the perfect righteousness of Christ, includhig his active and passive obedience, he proceeds to regard and treat us accord- ingly, pronouncing all the penal claims of law to be satisfied, CALVINISTIC DOCTRINE. Ill and lis to be graciously entitled to all the immunities and rewards conditioned in the original Adamic covenant upon perfect obedience. 5th. Although absolute moral perfection is unattainable in this life, and assurance is not of the essence of faith, it is never- theless possible and obligatory upon each believer to seek after and attain to a full assurance of his own personal salvation, and leaving the things that are behind to strive after perfection in all things. 6th. Although if left to himself every believer would fall in an instant, and although most believers do experience tem- porary seasons of backsliding, yet God by the exercise of his grace in their hearts, in pursuance of the provisions of the eternal Covenant of Grace and of the purpose of Christ in dying, infallibly prevents even the weakest believer from final apostasy.