51? CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY lOt-D The date shows, when- this volume ^as taken. : ' HOME UStfULES. - lISMr'OS i All Books subject iu. Recall. ~- Books not needed' jjfor instruction or re- Iiearch are returnable' within 4 weeks. Volumes of periodi- cals and of pamphlefs are held in the library . as much as possible. For special purposes they are given out for a lit^ited time. ^ Borrowers should ' not use their library privileges for the bene- fit of .other persons. Books -not -needed during recess ""periods should be returned' to the library, or arrange- ments made for their return during borrow-i er's absence, if wanted. Books needed by more than one person are held on the reserve list. ♦ Books of special value and gift books, when the gjver wishes ^ it, are not allowed to _^ circulate. Hacking books strictly (or- . bidden. Readers are asked , to report all "cases of books marked or muti- lated. , ,; Cornell University Library BR50 .N95 1867 Collection of theoloalcal essays from va Clin 3 1924 029 219 734 The original of tliis bool< is in tine Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924029219734 COLLECTION or THEOLOGICAL ESSAYS VARIOUS AUTHORS. WITH AN INTRODUCTION, BY GEORGE R.'*^OYES, D.D., PBOrESSOR OF SAPRED MTERATUEB tV HARVARD UfTITERSITT* FIFTH EDITIOH. BOSTON: AMERICAN UNITARIAN ASSOCIATION. 1 867. Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1856, by Tub American Unitarian Associatio.v, Id the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the District of Massachusetts ■UfMiVERSITY LIBRARY TTniTersity Press, Cambridge : Printed by Welch, Bigelow, and Company. ijS CONTENTS. PARE Introdaction. By Geoi^e E. Noyes t Faith and Science. By M. Guizot. 1 The Law and tlie Gospel. By Kev. Baden Powell. . . .27 The Doctrine of Inspiration. By Dr. F. A. D. Tholuck. . 65 Holy Scripture. By Eev. Eowland Williams 118 Servants of God speaking as moved by the Holy Ghost. By Rer. Eowland Williams 127 The Spirit and the Letter, or the Tnith and the Book. By Eev. Eowland Williams 147 On the Causes which probably conspired to produce our Saviour's Agony. By Eev. Edward garwood. . . . . . 167 Of our Lord's Fortitude. By Eev. William Newcome. . . 197 The Doctrine of the Atonement. By Benjamin Jowett. . . 221 On Eighteousness by Faith. By Benjamin Jowett. . . . 239 On the Imputation of the Sin of Ad.am. By Benjamin Jowett. . 265 On Conversion and Changes of Character. By Benjamin Jowett. 273 Casuistry. By Benjamin Jowett. 299 On the Connection of Immoralify and Idolatry. By Benjamin Jowett 321 The Old Testament. By Benjamin Jowett. . . . . . 325 On the Quotations from the Old Testament in the New. By Benja- min Jowett. , 329 Fragment on the Character of St. Paul. By Benjamin Jowett. . 341 IV CONTENTS. St. Paul and the Twelve. By Benjamin Jowett. . . . 357 Evils in the Church of the Apostolical Age. By Benjamin Jowett 383 On the Belief in the Coming of Christ in the Apostolical Age. By Benjamin Jowett . . 393 The Death of Christ, considered as a Sacrifice. By Bev. James Foster. 403 The Epistles to the Corinthians, in Relation to the Gospel History. By Eev. Arthur P. Stanley. 415 Apostolical Worship. By Rev. Arthur P. Stanley. . . . 437 The Eucharist. By Rev. Arthur P. Stanley. .... 443 Unity and Variety of Spiritual Gifts. By Bev. Aithur P. Stanley. 447 The Gift of Tongues and the Gift of Prophesying. By Rev. Ar- thur P. Stanley 453 Love, the greatest of Gifts. By_Eev. Arthur P. Stanley. . . 472 The Resurrection of Christ. By Rev. Arthur P. Stanley. . . 477 The Besun-ection of the Dead. By Eev. Arthur P. Stanley. . 482 On the Credibility of Miracles. By Dr. Thomas Brovra. . . 485 Note A. . . .• 605 NoteB 512 INTRODUCTION. The following collection of Theological Essays is designed for students in divinity, Sunday-school teachers, and all intelligent readers who desire to gain correct views of religion, and especially of the char- acter, use, and meaning of the Scriptures. It was suggested by the recent excellent Commentary on the Epistles of Paul by Rev. Mr. Jowett, now Professor of Greek in the University of Oxford. Understanding that this work was not likely to be' reprinted in this country, and that the high price of the English edition rendered it inaccessible to most readers, it appeared to me that a collection of Theological Essays, which should include the most important dissertations con- nected with that Commentary, would be a valuable publication. Mr. Jowett seems to me to have pene- trated more deeply into the views and spirit of Paul, and the circumstances under which he wrote, than any previous English commentator. Some of the best results of his labors are presented in the Essays which are now republished in this collection. Mr. Jowett's notes might have been more satisfactory in some respects if, in addition to other German commen- taries which he has mentioned, he had made use of those of De Wette and Meyer. But no illustrative dissertations in any German commentary with which VI INTRODUCTION. we are acquainted are equal in value to those of Jowett. His freedom and independence are espe- cially to be admired in a member of the Church of England, and Professor in the University of Oxford. In the selection of the dissertations by other writers, regard was had partly to their rarity, and partly to then: intrinsic value, and the light which they throw on important subjects which occupy the minds of re- ligious inquirers at the present day. Three Essays are taken from Kitto's Journal of Sacred Literature, an English periodical conducted by clergymen of the Established Church, of which few copies are circu- lated in this country. The first, by M. Guizot, the eminent writer and statesman of France, presents the subject of Faith in an interesting point of view, and closes with an admirable lesson on the importance of the free discussion of religious subjects. The second Essay, by Rev. Eaden Powell, an emi- nent Professor in the University of Oxford, and author of several weU-known publications, contains an able discussion of a very important subject, which appears to be now attracting some notice in this country ; distinguished divines of the Baptist denomination taking the view of Dr. Powell, and some of the Or- thodox Congregationalists opposing it. The prevalent opinion, which regards the Old Testament as an au- thority in religion and morals equally binding upon Christians with the New, appears to me to have had a disastrous influence on the interests of the Church and the interests of humanity. The history of the civil wars of England and Scotland, the early history of New England, and the state of opinion at the pres- ent day on the subjects of war, slavery, punishment for religious opinion, and indeed punishment in gen- INTRODUCTION. Vii eral, illustrate the noxious influence of the prevalent sentiment. A writer in one of the most distinguished theological journals in this country has been for some time engaged in the vain attempt to prove, in opposi- tion to the plainest language, that the laws of the Pentateuch do not sanction chattel slavery. It was not thus that the great champion of the Protestant Reformation proceeded, when the authority of the Old Testament was invoked to justify immorality. When some of his contemporaries were committing unjusti- fiable acts against the peace and order of the commu- lity, and vindicated themselves by appealing to the Old Testament, Luther wrote a treatise entitled " Instruc- tion on the Manner in which Moses is to be read," containing the following passage, which, in the clear- ness and force of its style, might have been imitated with advantage by some of his countrymen : " Moses was a mediator and lawgiver to the Jews alone, to whom he gave the Law. If I take Moses in one com- mandment, I must take the whole of Moses. Moses is dead. His dispensation is at an end. He has no longer any relation to us. I will accept Moses as an instructor, but not as a lawgiver, except where he agrees with the New Testament, or with the law of nature. When any one brings forward Moses and his precepts, and would oblige you to observe them, answer him thus : ' Go to the Jews with your Moses ! I am no Jew. If I take Moses as a master in one point, I am bound to keep the whole law, says St. Paul.' K now the disorganizers say, ' Moses has commanded it,' do you let Moses go, and say, ' I ask not what Moses has commanded.' ' But,' say they, ' Moses has commanded that we should believe in God, that we should not take liis name in vain, that yiu INTRODUCTION. we should honor our father and mother, &c. Must we not keep these commandments ? ' Answer them thus : ' Nature has given these commandments. Na- ture teaches man to call upon God, and hence it is natural to honor God, not to steal, not to commit adultery, not to bear false witness, &c. Thus I keep the commandments which Moses has given, not be- cause he enjoined them, but because nature implanted them in me.' But if any one say, ' It is all God's word,' answer him thus : ' God's word here, God's word there. I must know and observe to whom this word is spoken. I must know not only that it is God's word, but whether it is spoken to me or to an- other. I listen to the word which concerns me, &e. "We have the Gospel.' " * I would not be understood to maintain every sentiment which Dr. Powell has advanced ; but his views in general appear to me not only sound, but highly important. The Essay on the subject of Inspiration, by Tho- luck, is to be found in English only in the same for- eign journal. The views of a biblical student who enjoys so great a reputation among Christians of various denominations in all parts of the world need no recommendation. The translation I have carefully compared with the original, and found to be made with great fidelity and accuracy. The three Essays which follow on the use and character of the Scriptures are taken from a recent volume of sermons, entitled " Rational Godliness," by Rev. Rowland Williams, a clergyman and distin- guished scholar of the Established Church of Eng- land, having been delivered before the Chancellor and * See the passage in Luther's works, or as quoted by Bretschneider, Dogmatik, Vol. I. p. 181. INTRODUCTION. IX University of Cambridge. They appear to me suffi- ciently valuable to be reprinted. The writer may be thought by some to undervalue external authority, whUe maintaining the rights of intuition and expe- rience as means of attaining Christian truth. But have not many Christians since the time of Paley paid too exclusive regard to the former ? It seems to me that those who accept the New Testament records of miracles as genuine and authentic, will not fail to receive from them their due influence, and will be in no danger of attaching too great importance to intui- tive faith and Christian experience. The older the world grows, the less must religious faith depend on history and tradition, and the more on the power of the human soul, assisted by the promised Paraclete, to recognize revealed truth by its own light. The four Essays which follow relate to the great subject of the Atonement by Christ, and are designed to establish the true view of it, in opposition to cer- tain false theories which human speculation has con- nected with it, dishonorable to the character of God, pernicious in their influence on man, and having no foundation in the Scriptures or in reason. The Essay on the Causes which probably conspired to produce our Saviour's Agony, is by a distinguished English scholar of the last century, the author of an Introduc- tion to the New Testament, and of a tjanslation of the same, which, though it departs too much from the simplicity of the Comnton Version, is highly creditable to the author as a critic and a man of learning. The Essay which is here republished is commended by Archbishop Newcome in his very valuable observa- tions, which follow, on substantially the same subject, the Fortitude of our Saviour. The two Essays INTEODUCTION. appear to me to give a triumphant vindication of the character of our Saviour from the charges which have been brought against it by unbelievers, and, hypothet- ically, by some Christian divines, founded on certain expressions of feeling manifested a short time before his death, which his faithful historians have recorded for our instruction and consolation. It so happens that that part of one of the specula- tive theories connected with the Christian doctrine of atonement which is most repulsive to the feelings of many Christians, is absolutely without foundation in th« Scriptures, or in the faith of the Church for many centuries after the death of Christ. I refer to that opinion which represents him as receiving supernatu- ral pain or torture immediately from the hand of God, over and above that which was inflicted by human instrumentality, or which arose naturally from the circumstances in which he, as God's minister for es- tablishing the Christian religion, was placed, and from the peculiar sensibility of his natural constitution. The very statement of this theory by some distin- guished theologians shocks the feelings of many Chris- tians like the language of impiety. Thus Dr. Dwight says : " Omniscience and Omnipotence are certainly able to communicate, during even a short time, to a finite mind, such views of the hatred and contempt of God towards sin and sinners, and of course towards a substitute for sinners, as would not only fill its capa- city for suffering, but probably put an end to its existence. In this manner, I apprehend, the chief distresses of Christ were produced." * What ideas ! The omnipotence and omniscience of God are first * Dwight's Theology, Vol. II. p. 214. INTKODUCTION. xi called in to communicate a sense of his hatred and contempt to a sinless man, and, secondly, the suffer- ings and even the death of Christ are represented as the immediate consequence of his sense of God's hatred and contempt ! Dr. Macknight, a theologian of considerable celeb- rity, gives a somewhat different view^, but equally appalling. He says : " Our Lord's pertm-bation and agony, therefore, arose from the pains which were inflicted upon him by the hand of God, when he made his soul an offering for sin Though Jesus knew no sin, God might, by the immediate operation of his power, make him feel those pains which shall be the punishment of sin hereafter, in order that, by the visi- ble effects which they produced upon him, mankind might have a just notion of the greatness of these pains His bearing those pains, with a view to show how great they are, was by no means punish- ment. It was merely suffering." * Such is the repre- sentation of Dr. Macknight, in a treatise entitled " The Conversion of the World to Christianity " ! In his Institutes,! Calvin undoubtedly represents Christ as suffering the pains of hell in the present, not the future life. He expressly explains the seem- ing paradox that Christ should descend into hell before his death. A recent work by Krummacher, which has been industriously circulated in New England, contains a representation similar to that of Dwight and Mac- knight, in language still more horrible. Other recent writers in New England have sanctioned the same view. * See Macknight, in Watson's Tracts, Vol. V. p. 183. t Book II. ch. 16,4 10. 11- XU INTRODUCTION. Now to this theory a decisive objection is, that it has not the least foundation in the Scriptures, and that it is in fact inconsistent with the general tenor ol the New Testament, which speaks of Christ's suffer- ings in connection with the obvious second causes of them, recorded in the history; namely, the reviling and persecuting of his enemies, the coldness and desertion of his disciples, the dark prospects of his mission,* his blood, his death, and the terrible persecution of his followers, which Were to precede the establishment of his religion. Of the immediate infliction of pain by the Deity, over and above what Jewish malice in- flicted upon him, we find not a word. There is not a particle of evidence to show that any of the sufferings of Christ were inflicted upon him by any more direct or immediate agency on the part of God, than those of other righteous men who have been persecuted to death in the cause of truth and righteousness. The text in Isa. liii. 10, — " Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him ; he hath put him to grief ; when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin," &c., — is often referred to. But such an application of this text can be shown to be wrong in two ways : — 1. It can be de- monstrated, on principles of interpretation universally acknowledged, that the " servant of God," in this and the preceding chapters, denotes, at least in its primary sense, the Jewish church, the Israel of God, who suffered on account of the sins of others in the time of the captivity at Babylon. I cannot, for want of space, go into a defence of this view. But I fully believe it to be correct, and it is maintained by the most unbiassed and scientific interpreters of the Old * Luke xviii. 8 ; Matt. x;iiV. 24. INTRODUCTION. Xili Testament* 2. The language in question denotes no more direct and immediate agency of tlie Deity, than that which is everywhere, both in the Old Tes- tament and the New, ascribed to the Deity in refer- ence to the suiferings of the prophets and apostles. Comp. Ps. xxxix. 9, 10 ; Jer. xv, 17, 18 ; xx. 7, &c. ; xi. 18, 19 ; Lam. iii. So in the New Testament, if St. Paul tells lis that Christ was " set forth as a pro- pitiatory sacrifice," he also says, " For I think that God has set forth us the apostles last, as it were appointed to death." Indeed, there is no idiom in the Scriptures more obvious than that which represents all the blessings and afflictions of life, by whatever instrumentality produced, as coming from God. Modern speculative theologians, not finding in the sacred history, or in any Scripture statement, any au- thority for their supposition of a miraculous suffering or torment, inconceivable in degree, inflicted by the immediate agency of God upon the soul of Christ, resort to mere theory to support their position. If, say they, Christ was not enduring " vicarious suffer- ing," inconceivable in degree, inflicted on his soul by the immediate exertion of Almighty power, then it follows that he did not bear his sufferings so well as many martyrs, — so well as " the thieves on the cross," so well as " thousands and millions of common men without God and without hope in the world." t Without repeating the explanations of Dr. Harwood * That the phrase " servant of God " is a collective term, denoting the people of God, comprehending the Jfewish nation, or the better part of the Jewish nation, that is, the Jewish church, has been maintained by such critics as Doderlein, RosenmOUer, Jahn, Gesenius, Maurer, Knobel, Ewald, Hitzig ; also by the old Jewish critics, such as Aben Ezra, Jar- chi, Abarbanel, and Eimchi. T See Stuart on Hebrews, Exc. XI. p. 575. b XIV INTRODUCTION. and Archbishop Newcome, it may be remarked, — 1. That at best this is only an argument ad Christior num. The sceptic and the scoffer are ready to accept the statement of the orthodox divine, and to tell him that, while the manner in which Christ endured his sufferings is matter of history, his way of accounting for them is pure theory. - 2. It is very remarkable that the speculative theolo- gians have not seen that a quality exhibited in such perfection by "thousands and millions without God and without hope in the world," " by the thieves on the cross," and, it might have been added, by any number of bloodthirsty pirates and savage Indians, was one the absence of which implied no want of moral excellence ; that it was a matter of natural temperament, of phys- ical habits, and of the firm condition of the nervous system, rather than of moral or religious character. Moral excellence is seen, not in insensibility to pain or danger, but in unwavering obedience to duty in defiance of pain and danger. The greater sense Jesus had and expressed of the sufferings which lay in his path, the greater is the moral excellence exhibited in overcoming them. In order to satisfy myself of the perfection of the character of Jesus, all I wish to know is that his obedience was complete; that his grief, fears, and doubts were momentary ; that his most earnest expostulations and complaints, if so they may be called, were wrung from him by causes which are plainly set forth in the sacred history, while he was engaged without hesitation, without voluntary reluctance, nay, with the most supreme devotion of his will, in the greatest work ever wrought for man. For my part, I am not ashamed to say, that I have a jdistinct feeling of gratitude, not only for the woik INTKODUCTION. XT which Christ performed, but for every expression of human feeling, whether of grief, or momentary doubt, or fear, or interrupted sense of communion with God, which he manifested. I should feel that I was robbed of an invaluable treasure of encouragement and con- solation, if any one expression of feeling, whether in his words or otherwise, caused by such sufferings as all men, in a greater or less degree, are called to en- dure, should be blotted from the sacred record. In the midst of deep affliction, and the fear of deeper, noth- ing has given me greater support than the repetition of the prayer in Gethsemane, once uttered in agony of soul, " K it be possible, let this cup pass from me! Nevertheless, not as I wUl, but as thou wilt ! " Now I know that " we have not a high-priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities ; but was In all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin." 3. Those who maintain that the character of Christ was imperfect or sinful, unless he received immediate- ly from the hand of God inconceivably greater suffer- ings than were occasioned by human instrumentalities, and the second causes w^hich are matters of history, do not make it clear how by their theory they relieve his character from the charges which they have hypo- thetically brought against it. K the manner in which Christ endured his sufferings was unworthy of him, — ' if it was faulty or sinful, — if his expressions in the garden of Gethsemane, or upon the cross, were wrong, — then no degree of suffering which the hu- man imagination can conceive to have been endured by him can make them right. Strength of temptation can palliate what is wrong, but cannot make it right Whatever was the nature of Christ's sufferings, how- ever great in degree, and however immediately theiy XVI INTRODUCTION. •were inflicted" by God, 3till, unless his memory of the past, as recorded in the Gospels, was wholly effaced, he had greater advantages than other men. He knew what testimonials and powers he had received from God. He knew that he was the object of Divine love. He knew that he had consented to his sufferings, and that they were a part of his work ; he had no sense of sin to aggravate them ; he knew that they were for a short time, and that they were certainly to be fol- lowed by a glorious resurrection, and by endless bless- edness for himself and his followers. How then are what Dr. Dwight calls " the bitter complaints " of Jesus absolutely justifiable on his theory of the nature and causes of Christ's sufferings, if not on that view which has its basis, not in mere reasoning, but in the Scripture history, and which is set forth by Dr. Har- wood and Archbishop Newcome in this volume? If all the mental and bodily sufferings naturally caused to Jesus by the malice of the Jews, the desertion of his disciples, and all the circumstances in which he was placed, cannot justify our Saviour's expressions, whether in language or otherwise, then no sufferings or torments the human imagination can conceive to have been immediately inflicted by God can justify them. In fact, the knowledge that they were inflicted immediately by the band of God would have a ten- dency to make them more tolerable. Who would not drink the cup certainly known to be presented to his lips by the hand of his Almighty Father ? I have no difficulty in the case, because I believe all the expres- sions of Jesus in relation to his sufferings, which have been supposed to indicate a want of fortitude, to have been momentary, extorted from him by overpowering pain of body and mind. IXTltODUCTIO-V. xvH It is also to be observed, in connection with the preceding remarks, that what may be called the rich imagination of Jesus, as displayed in the beauty of liis illustrations and his parables, as well as various expressions of strong feehng on several occasions in the course of his ministry, indicate an exquisite sensibility, which no debasement of sin had ever blunted. Without anticipating what is said in the excellent Essays of Dr. Harwood and Archbishop Newcome, I may make one more remark. Injustice seems to me to have been done to Jesus by comparing his short distress of mind on two or three occasions with what may have been as short a composure of some distin- guished martyrs, — Socrates for instance, — without taking into view the habitual fortitude of Christ. Now if any one believes that the feelings which Socrates exhibited when he drank the hemlock in prison, as described by Plato, were all which entered his mind from the time when he incurred the deadly hatred and persecution of the Athenians, and that no doubts or fears or misgivings occurred to him at any moment, in the solitude of his prison or elsewhere, I have only to say that his view of what is incident to human nature is very different from mine. Would Jesua have prayed, an hour before his suffering in Geth- semane, that his disciples might have the peace, and even the joy, which he possessed, had not the habitual state of his feelings been tranquil and composed ? Panegyrists have described the bravery with which some martyrs have endured their sufferings before the eyes of their adrnir^s, Jesus, who suffered not with ft vievy to human applause, but to human consolation f^nd sedvation, was not asl^amed or afraid to express 6* XVlll INTRODUCTION. all which he felt, and his faithful biographers were not ashamed or afraid to record it. I have intimated that the view of the cause of. our Savioui-'s principal suflferings, which I have endeavored to oppose, is not found in the Scriptures, nor in the general faith of the Church. It is the fruit of com- paratively modern speculation. For proof of the last assertion, I refer to the standard works on the history of Christian doctrines. In regard to the principal ut- terance of our Saviour, to which reference has been made in relation to this subject, in the words of the first verse of the twenty-second Psalm, I cannot agree with those who find in them no expression of anguish or tone of expostulation, and who suppose them to be cited by our Saviour merely in order to suggest the confidence and triumph with which the Psalm ends ; but which do not begin before the twenty-second verse. Under the circumstances of the case, the words appear to have had substantially the same meaning when uttered by Christ as when uttered by the Psalmist. They should not be interpreted as the deliberate result of calm reflection, but as an outburst of strong involuntary emotion, forced from our Saviour by anguish of body and mind, in the words which naturally occurred to him, implying momentary expos- tulation, or even complaint. But that the interruption of the consciousness of God's presence and love was only momentary, both in the case of the Psalmist and of the Saviour, is evident, first, from the expression, My God! my God! repeated with earnestness; secondly, from the expressions of confidence in the course of the Psalm, which might follow in the mind of Christ as well as in that of the Psalmist ; and thirdly, from the usage of language, according tq whiph the expression INTRODUCTION. XJX *' to be forsaken by God " merely means " not to be delivered from actual or impending distress." The very parallel line in the verse under consideration, " Why art thou so far from helping me ? " is, accord- ing to the laws of Hebrew parallelism, a complete exposition of the language, " Why hast thou forsaken me ? " So Ps. xxxviii. 21, 22, " Forsake me not, O Lord ! O my God, be not far from me ! Make haste to help me, O Lord, my salvation ! " Other passages are Ps. x. 1, xiii. 1, Ixxiv. 1, Ixxxviii. 14. As the historical passages in which Christ expressed his feelings under the sufferings which he endured or feared, are of great interest, it may be satisfactory to many readers if I translate, and place in a note at the end of the volume,* the expositions of them given by men who are regarded by competent judges of aU ' denominations of Christians as standing in the very first rank as unbiassed, learned, scientific expositors of the Scriptures. De Wette, Liicke, Meyer, Bleek, and Liinemann will be admitted by all who are acquainted with their writings to stand in that rank. After the Essays on the nature and causes of the sufferings of Christ, and the manner in Which he bore them, I have selected two on the design and influence of these sufferings in the atonement which he effected : one by that admirable writer, James Foster,! the most celebrated preacher of his day, of whom Pope wrote, long ago, " Let modest Foster, if he will, excel Ten metropolitans in preaching well " ; and the other by Professor Jowett, of whom I have al- ready spoken. The two dissertations, taken together, * See Note A. t By accident this Essay does not appear in its proper place in this volume, but will be found on page 403. XX INTRODUCTION. appear to me to give a very fair and Scriptural vie-W of the Christian doctrine of atonement. The great variety of theories which the specula- tions of Protestants have connected with the Christian doctrine of atonement is alone sufficient to show on what a sandy foundation some of them rest. As sacrifices of blood, in which certain false views of Christian redemption had their origin, passed away from the world's regard gradually, so one error after another has been from time to time expunged from the theory of redemption which prevailed at the time of •the Protestant Reformation. Luther laid it down plain- ly, that the sins of all mankind were imputed to Christ, so that he was regarded as guilty of them and pun- ished for them. Thus he says : " And this, no doubt, all the prophets did foresee in spirit, that Christ should become the greatest transgressor, murderer, adulter- er, thief, rebel, and blasphemer that ever was or could be in all the world. For he, being made a sacrifice for the sins of the whole world, is not now an innocent person and without sin ; is not now the Son of God, born of the Virgin Mary ; but a sinner, which hath and carrieth the sin of Paul, who was a blasphemer, an oppressor, and a persecutor ; of Peter, which denied Christ ; of David, which was an adulterer, a murder- er, &c Whatsoever sins I, thou, and we all have done, or shall do hereafter, they are Christ's own sins as verily as if he himself had done them But wherefore is Christ punished ? Is it not because he hath sin, and beareth sin ? " * Luther's theory was once the prevalent one in the Protestant Church. It is also to be observed, as it contributes to the better understanding of the New England theories * Luther pn Gal. iii. 13. INTKODUCTION. XXi which prevail at the present day, that the view of Luther was at one time almost universal in New England. In the year 1650, William Pynchon, a gen- tleman of learning and talent, and chief magistrate of Springfield, wrote a book in which, in the language of Cotton Mather, " he pretends to prove that Christ suffered not for us those unutterable torments of God's wrath which are commonly called hell torments, to redeem our souls fi-om them, and that Christ bore not our sins by God's imputation, and therefore also did not bear the curse of the law for them." The General Court of Massachusetts, as soon as the book was received from England, wliere it was printed, immediately called Mr. Pynchon to account for his heresy, dismissed him from his magistracy, caused his book to be publicly burned in Boston mar- ket, and appointed three elders to confer with him, and bring him to an acknowledgment of his error.* They also chose Rev. John Norton, of Ipswich, to answer his book, after they had condemned all the copies of it to be burned, f Mr. Norton's answer is now before us, in which he repeats over and over again the prevalent doctrine of the time : — " Christ suffered a penal hell, but not a local ; he descended into hell virtually, not locally ; that is, he suffered the pains of hell due unto the elect, who for their sin de- served to be damned." " Christ sufiered the essential penal wrath of God, which answers the suflfering of the second death, due to the elect for their sin, before he suffered his natural death." " Christ was tor- mented without, any forgiveness ; God spared him nothing of the due debt." * See Records of Massachusetts Bay, Vol. IV. Part I. pp. 29, 30 j also Holland's Plistory of Western Massachusetts, Vol, I. p. 37, &e. t See Note B. XXU INTKODUCTION. Flavel, a Nonconformist clergyman in England, whose writings continue to be published by the Amer- ican Tract Society, and who was contemporaneous with John Norton, thus writes : " To wrath, to the wrath of an infinite God without mixture, to the very torments of hell, was Christ delivered, and that by the hands of his own Father.",* "As it was all the wrath of God. that lay upon Christ, so it was his wrath aggravated in diverse respects beyond that which the damned themselves do suffer." f In the Confession of Faith J owned and consented to by the churches assembled in Boston, New Eng- land, May 12, 1680, and recommended to all the churches by the General Court held October 5, 1679, is contained the following (Ch. VIII. 4) : « The Lord Jesus Christ underwent the punishment due to us, which we should have borne and suffered, being made sin and a curse for us, enduring most excruciat- ing torments immediately from God in his soul, and most painful sufferings in his body." This was copied verbatim into the celebrated Saybrook Plat- form, adopted by the churches of Connecticut, Sep- tember 9, 1708. Some of the preceding views, for questioning which one of the wisest and best men in Massachusetts was so much harassed as to feel obliged to leave the Commonwealth, are now as universally rejected as * Fountain of Life Opened, p. 10, Ser. IV. fol. edit. t Ibid., p. 106. t Tiiis Confession was taken, witli a few slight variations in confoimity with the Westminster Confession, from tlie " Savoy Declaration," that is, "A Declaration of the Faith and Order owned and practised in the Congregational Churches in England ; agreed upon and consented unto by their elders and messengers at the Savoy [a part of London], October 12th, 1658," wMch may be seen in " Hanbury's Historical Me- morials," p. 532, &c. INTUODUCTION. Xxni itiey were once received. But the most objectionable part of them, in a religious point of view, that which supposes supernatural sufferings or tortures to have been immediately inflicted by the Deity upon the soul of Christ, is still retained by many. The late Pro- fessor Stuart, as we have seen, supported this view on the ground that the character of Christ for fortitude would otherwise suffer. Many of the books indus- triously circulated by the Orthodox sects among the laity contain the doctrine in a very offensive form. The Assembly's Catechism, which declares that Christ " endured the wrath of God," evidently in the sense of Norton and Flavel, is scattered by thousands among the people, and made the standard of faith in the principal theological school of this Common- wealth. Vincent, whose explanation of the Assem- bly's Catechism has just been repubhshed by the Presbyterian Board of Publication, says : " He, to- gether with the pain of his body on the cross, endured the wrath of God, due for man's sin, in his soul." With the progress of intellectual and moral philos- ophy, however, the doctrine of the imputation of sin to one who had not committed it, came to be held as a mere fiction by many, who yet retained that part of the old doctrine which maintains that Christ bore the punishment of the sins of all mankind. This view avoids the now evident fiction involved in charging the sins of the guilty upon the innocent; but it has no advantage over I^uther's doctrine in reference -to the character of the Deity. Luther's theory paid so much homage to the natural sentiments of justice in the human soul, as to make the attempt, though a vain one, to reconcile the conduct which his theology ascribed to God with those sentiments. laither, with XXIV INTRODUCTION. John Norton and others of his school, felt as strongly as any Unitarian of the present day, that, where there is punishment, there must be ^uilt, and an accusing conscience* They held, therefore, that Christ was punished because' he was guilty, and " sensible of an accusing conscience." But the more modern theory, which holds that Christ bore the punishment of all men's sins without bearing their guilt, involves the idea of punishment wi1;hout guilt in him who suffers it. It takes away the hypothesis which alone gave it even the show of consistency with the justice of God. The perception of the incongruity involved in the supposition that one should receive punishment who is without guilt, has therefore led many theologians to give up this part of the old theory. It was aban- doned by many in England as long ago as the time of Baxter. In New England, since the time of Dr. Edwards the younger, several theological writers have maintained that, as there can be no punishment with- out a sense of guilt and condemnation of conscience, but only pain, suffering, torment, it is erroneous to say that Christ endured vicarious punishment for the sins of mankind. Vicarious pain or torment might be en- dured by the innocent, but not vicarious punishment. Some, also, Oi] the ground that the sufferings of Christ bear no proportion, in amount and duration, to the punishment which was threatened against sinners, have even rejected the terra vicarious as inapplicable. Dr. Dwight says : " It will not be supposed, as plainly it cannot, that Christ suffered in his divine nature. Nor will it be believed that any created nature could in that short space of time suffer what would be equivalent' to even a slight distress extended through * See Norton's Answer, &c. p. 119. DfTSODUCTION. XX7 eternity."* " When, therefore, we are told that it phased Jehovah to Imiise him, it was not as a punish- ment." f " It is not true," says Edwards the younger, " that Christ endured an equal quantity of misery to that which would have been endured by all his people, had they suffered the curse of the law As the eternal Logos was capable of neither enduring misery nor losing happiness, all the happiness lost by the. substitution of Christ was barely that of the man Christ Jesus, during only thirty-three years ; or rather during the last three years of his life." ^ Dr. Em- mons says : " His sufferings were no punishment, much less our punishment. His sufferings were by no means equal in degree or duration to the eternal sufferings we deserve, and which God has threatened to inffct upon us. So that he did in no sense bear the penalty of the law which we have broken, and justly deserve." § But this concession of the more modern New Eng- land theologians to the imperative claims of reason is not of so much importance as it may at first view appear. To say that Christ did not endure the punish- ment of the sins of mankind, nor indeed any punish- ment whatever, but only an amount of suffering or tofment which, in its effect as an expression of the Di- Tine mind, and in upholding the honor of the Divine government, Was an equivalent to the infliction of the punishment tlnreatened against sin, is of little avail, BO long as it is maintained that the chief sufferings of our Saviour were of a miraculous character, incon- ceivable in degree, immediately inflicted upon him by * Ser. LVI. Vol. H. p. 217. t Ibia.,p. 2U. % Seanons on the Atonement, Works, Vol. H. p. 43. S Works, Vol. V. p. 32. c XXvi INTKODUCTION. the hand of God over and above those which he in- curred from human opposition and persecution in the accomplishment of his work. The concession is made to philosophy, not to religion. So far as the Divine character is concerned, it is of little consequence whether you call the sufferings of Christ punishment, or only tortuire immediately inflicted by God for the mere purpose of being contemplated by intelligent beings. Suppose that Christ had ordered the beloved Apos- tle John to be crucified, in order to show his dis- pleasure at sin, when he forgave Peter, of what conse- quence would it be to say that John was not punished, but only tortured, for the sin of Peter? Would Christ deserve the more to be regarded as a righteous being, an upholder of law, a wise moral governor, for inflicting inconceivable anguish of body and mind upon John as the sole ground and condition of forgiv- ing the sin of Peter ? How many of the theologians of New England at the present day retain this theory of miraculous suf- fering immediately inflicted by the Deity upon the soul of Christ, I have no means of ascertaining. It is not easy to see why the advocates of the govern- mental theory, after admitting that the sufferings of Christ were finite and of brief duration, that they were not the punishment, nor, as a penalty, equivalent to the punishment, of the sinner, should seek by mere ratiocination to magnify the sufferings of Christ be- yond what the sacred history has recorded them to be, and to bring in the omnipotence and the omniscience of the Deity to inflict a pain which human malice and second causes could not inflict. The mere amount of suffering does not seem to be essential to this theory. The Scriptures contain, as we have seen, INTRODUCTION. XXVII nothing for it. On the contrary, they seem to be positively agednst it, in insisting, as they do, on the l/k)od of Christ, the death of Christ as a sacrifice, rather than on what he suffered before he died. It is just to state that I do not find, in the sermons on the atonement by Dr. Edwards the younger. Dr. Em- mons, and Dr. Woods, reference to any sufferings of Christ, except those which were naturally incident to the discharge of his duty. True, they say nothing against the view held by Dr. Dwight, Dr. Macknight, and some recent writers. But it is to be hoped that they omitted the theory of miraculous suffering, im- mediately inflicted by the Deity upon the soul of Christ, because they had abandoned it. May the time soon come when all the advocates of the govern- mental theory shall cease to insist on a firagment of the old theory of penal satisfaction, which has no his- torical foundation, which is shocking to the feelings of many Christians, and strengthens the objections of the enemies of Christianity. On the other hand, it appears to me that some writers, looking at the subject chiefly in the light of the principles of moral and religious philosophy, have given a somewhat imperfect view of the sentiments of St Paul respecting the significance of the death of Christ, by maintaining that he limited the influence of it to its immediate effect in producing the refor- mation and sanctification of the sinner. This latter view is indeed prominent throughout the Apostle's writings. Christians are represented as being bap- tized to the death of Christ ; that is, to die to sin as he died for it ; to be buried in baptism to sin, and to rise to a new spiritual life, as he was buried and rose to a new life. But the Apostle regards the death of Christ, XXTIU pfTEODUCTIOA. not only as exerting a sanctifying influence upon tbs heart, but as having a meaning and significance, con- sidered as an event taking place under the moral government of God, according to his will. Its raeapT Jng serves, according to him, at the same time to manifest the righteousness of God, and his mercy in accepting the true believer. " Whom in "Jus bJopd, through faith, God has set forth as a propitiatory sacri- fice, in order tp manifest his righteousness on aceouat of his passing by, in his forbearance, the sins of former times." * It is true that the design -of this providential event was stUl manifestation, and that the contemplation of the sacrifice, and the appropriation of it by faith, were regarded by the Apostle as leading to repentance and sanctifipation, as well as to peaci^ of mind. But he contemplates it in this passage under another aspect. He has what may be called a transcendental, as well as a practical, view of this, a^ of all events. He contemplates the death of Cblist, taking place according to God's will, as illustrating the mind of i3tod ; as manifesting his righteousness, though he forbore adequately tp punish the sins of former times, and in merpy accepted as righteous the true Christian believer. His view seems to be that God, by suffering such a person as Jesus, standing ii^ such a relatipn tp him, having a sinless character, an^ sustaining such an pffice in relatipn tp the wprld as( Christ did, tp suffer and die a painful and ignpminr ipus death, has declared how great an evil he regard^ sin to be, and how great a good he regards holiness to be ; in other words, his hatred of sin, and love of holiness. The greatness of the evil of sin, and of the * Bom. iii. 25. INTRODUCTION. XXIX good of righteousness, are to be seen in tbe greatness of the sacrifice which God, in his high providential government of the world, appointed, and which in the fulness of time Christ made. Why is not this view of St. Paul correct t God is surely to be seen, not only in the works of nature, in the intuitions of the soul, in immediate revelation, but also in the events of Providence. Especiedly the fact, that under the moral government of God the most righteous men, those in whom the spirit of God dwells most fully and most constantly, are willing to incur reproach and suf- fering in the cause of truth, righteousness, and human happiness, shows that the Giver of the Holy Spirit, the Source of all righteousness, regards sin as a great evil, and righteousness as a great good ; that is, hates sin, and loves holiness. Much more, then, if Christ, in whom was the spirit of God without measure, who knew no sin, and who was in various ways exalted above the sons of men, becomes, according to the will of God, and by his own consent, a sacrifice for sin, does he illustrate his Father's hatred of sin, and love of holiness. , It appears to me that Edwards the younger, and other advocates of what is called the governmental theory, have connected with the view of the Apostle Paul two great errors. One consists in regarding that as the direct and immediate design of the death of Christ which was only incidental to it, as a providen- tial event. This appears from the fact that the death of Christ is everywhere in the New Testament de- nounced as an evil and a crime. Of course, then, it was opposed to the direct revealed wiU of G^d. Everywhere in the New Testament we may learn that- the direct design of God in sending; his Son was TtTCTT INTKODUCTION. that the Jews, as well as others, should reverence him. « This is my beloved Son, hear ye him." " He that honoreth not the Son, honoreth not the Father." « Woe unto that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed." It is admitted by all, that the direct will of God is declared in his commands rather than in his providence. Unless the Jews had acted against the will of God, it could not be said that by " wicked hands" they had crucified and slain the Saviour. ' But when, instead of hearing and reverencing Christ, they persecuted and crucified him, this event was overruled by Divine Providence, so as to convey a re- ligious lesson concerning the attributes of God, and his government of the world. There is no more evi- dence that the Jews were instigated by God to ca:ucify Christ, than to kiU any prophet who had preceded him. There is no more evidence that this was ac- cording to the will of God, than any murder which ever took place. The Apostle Paul undoubtedly de- clares that Christ gave himself for us according to the will of God (Gal. i. 4) ; and that God had set him forth as a propitiatory sacrifice to manifest his right- eousness (Rom. iii. 25). But he uses similar language in regard to many other events. • Thus he declares that Pharaoh, the tyrant, was raised up to make known the power of God. (Rom. ix. 17.) But will it be pretended that God gave existence and power to Pharaoh for the direct and exclusive purpose of mak- ing known his power, and that his power could not be made known in any other way ? Was it not the will of God that Pharaoh should be a just and benefi- cent sovereign ? It is evident from the nature of the case, as well as from the current phraseology of the Scriptures, that the treachery of Judas, and the cruel- INTRODUCTION. XXXI fixion of Christ, were not more immediately ordained by God, than any other case of treachery and murder which ever took place in the world. It is plain, then, that the manifestation of the righteousness of God by the sacrifice of Christ, referred to by St. Paul, was the incidental or indirect design of it, as an event taking place under the government of God, against his re- vealed will. The crucifixion of Christ declares the righteousness of God, just as the wrath of man in all cases is caused to praise him. That the manifestation of the righteousness of God was only the incidental design of the sacrifice of Christ, appears also from this circumstance, that it is only when so regarded that it conveys to a rational mind an impression either of his righteousness or his wisdom. That God should so love the world as to send Christ to enlighten, reform, and bless it, though he foresaw that he would not accomplish his purpose without falling a sacrifice to human passions, gives an impression of his benevolence, and of his hatred of sin and love of holiness. But if he had imme- diately and directly commanded the Jewish priests to sacrifice him, or the Jewish rulers to insult, torture, and crucify him, simply that as an object of human contemplation he might manifest the righteousness of God, and his hatred of sin by his infliction of tor- ture on an innocent being, then no such effect would be produced by it. The Jewish priests themselves would have said that such a sacrifice was heathenish, an offering such as the Gentiles used to make to Moloch. All the world would say, that such a God- commanded sacrifice, such a direct and immediate infliction of suffering by the Almighty upon an inno- cent being, for the main purpose of making known his Xxxii INTEODUCTION. dispositions, and maintaining the honor of his gOTeru- ment, was a manifestation of any attribute rather than righteousness. We might believe an express verbal declaration, that such a direct infliction was designed to show God's righteousness; but in the fact itself of such torture, one could perceive neitiier righteousness nor wisdom. This may be clearly illusi- trated by an example. K a human sovereign, the emperor of Russia for in- stance, being engaged in war ■with a rebellious prov- ince, and having a son distinguished by military skill, courage, and humanity above aU his subjects, should send him at the head of an army, and expose him to all the casualties of war; in order to bring the province into submission, and this son should actually suffer death through the opposition of the rebels, who would net admire the self-demiat and benevolence ex- hibited by the monarch ? Suppose now, on the other hand^ that the rebels should, by the labors and sacrificeB of that son, have been brought to repentance and submission, and should humbly sue for pardon, and that the monare^ should say, " I will forgive you, but in order to express my feelings concerning the crim;e of rebellion, and to uphold the honor of my government, and maintain the cause of ordter, I must, as the condition of the for> giveness of your crime, inflict inconceivable anguish of mind and body upon my well-beloved son in the Hght of all my subjects," and should actually do it with hia orwn hands, would not the whole civilized w^orld condemn such a monarch as guilty of injustice, cruelty, and Mly? The consent of the son, could it be obtained, would only serve- ta deepen the cruelty and? folly of th&fe.tbeK INTRODtTCTION. XXXui The incidental eflFect of the soffering* of the Apostles ia spoken of as designed, as expressly as that of the euSerings of Christ. Thus St. Paul 6ays, " "Wheth- er we be afflicted, it is^ for your consolation and salvation." * Again, " Yea, and if I be offered up upon the sacrifice and service of your faith," f &c. Again, he speaks of himself as " filling up what is wanting of the sufferings of Christ," J thus implying that his own sufferings had the same general purpose as those of his Master. Again, the casting away of the Jews is reoresented by Paul in one verse as the reconciling or atonement of the world ; in another, as the punishment of the Jews for their unbelief. § It is readily conceded that a greater prominence, importance, and influence are assigned by Paul and other New Testament writers to the sacrifice of Christ, than to that of other righteous men. This is owing in part to his pre-eminent character, his supernatural powers and qualifications, the dignity of his office as head of the Church, and to the peculiar circumstances of his life and death. He had a greater agency than others in the work of the Christian atonement, of which, however, the Apostles were yet ministers. [| He was the head of the Church. The minds and feelings of the Apostles must have been in the highest degree affected by the ignominious death of their Master. It was the subject of the deepest gratitude that tiie blessings which they en- joyed were purchased by his blood. They had lost all hopes when he expired. His death was opposed to all their views of the MessiaJi. They had supposed tiiat he would live for ever, ^ This expectation was * 2 Cor. i. 6. t Ehil. ii. 17. t Col. i. 24. 5 Eom. xi. 15, 20. II 2 Cot. t. 18- t See Jcrtin xu. ff4 ; Matt. xVl. 22. XXXVr INTEOBUCTION. probably not wholly effaced from their minds till they saw him expire. When they preached the Gospel to the Gentiles, they preached the religion of one who had suffered like the vilest malefactor. The circum- stance that the death of Christ was so ignominious was a strong reason for their insisting upon it the more, as the means tlirough which they enjoyed the blessings of Christianity. The cross was a stum- bUng^block to the Jew, and foUy to the Gentile. The oftener objections were made to it, the more would the Apostles be led to dwell upon it, and to present it in every Hght in which it could be presented. In re- flecting upon the meaning of it as a providential event, the analogy between it and the sin-offerings of the Jews struck their imaginations forcibly. Certain passages in the prophetic writings, especially Isa. liii., which was originally spoken of the Jewish Church, were adapted to impart additional emphasis to this analogy. It is also very possible that I may have too closely defined the meaning of Paul and other Apostles, in representing the death of Christ as a sacrifice. This idea having once taken full possession of their imagi- nations, they may not always have kept in mind the boundary which divides figurative from plain lan- guage. They may have connected certain sacrificial ideas or feelings with the death of Christ, which a modern cannot fully appreciate, or strictly define. Being born Jews, familiar with sacrifices from their infancy, and writing to those who, whether Jews or Gentiles, had been accustomed to attach the same importance and efficacy to them, it was natural that they should represent the death of Christ in language borrowed from the Jewish ritual, and that they should INTRODUCTION. XXXV attach an importance to it which savors more of the religion which they had renounced, than of that which they had adopted. But so far as the question whether the atonement by Christ was effected by vica- rious punishment, or vicarious suffering, is concerned, it is of no consequence how much importance the Apostles attached to the sacrificial view. For there is no reason to believe that in literal sacrifices vicarious punishment, or suffering, was denoted, or that the pain endured by the animals offered had anything to do with their efficacy or significance.* The other error in the theory of Edwards the younger, and other advocates of the governmental theory, consists in representing the sufferings of Christ as absolutely necessary, as the ground of forgiveness, in the nature of things, or in the nature of the Divine government, or on account of the Divine veracity in reference to the declaration. The soul that sinneth, it shall die. Now in regard to this last consideration, that of the Divine veracity, it is certain that the threat- ened penalty of transgression is no more executed when the sinner is forgiven in consequence of severe suffering inflicted upon Christ, than if he were for- given, without such an infliction, in consequence of the eternal mercy of God. For the penalty was never threatened except against the sinner. Of course it can never be executed except upon the sinner. It has also been maintained by the advocates of the governmental theory, that to forgive sin on any other ground than that of the infliction of suffering upon Christ, equivalent, in the impression produced by it, to the eternal punishment of all the wicked, would * See Christian Examiner for September, 1855. XXXvi INTKODFCTION*- operaie as encouragement of wickedness. But it ie not easy to see why those who would be encouraged in sin by the hope of being forgiven through the eter- nal mercy of God, would not also be encouraged ift sin by the hope of being forgiven through the suffer- ing inflicted upon Christ, or through any consideration founded on past historical fact. The forgiveness is certain to him who repents and becomes a righteous man on either theory, and may encourage an evil- minded person in one case as well as the other. He who can harden himself in sin in consequence of the infinite mercy of God in forgiving the penitent, can do the same thing in consequence of the exceed- ing love of Christ as manifested in his death. That the advocates of some of the old theories should maintain the absolute necessity of vicarious suffering, does not appear strange. But that ijhe ad^ vocates of the governmental 'theory should maintain. its absolute necessity as the condition of the forgive- ness of sin, so that the Divine mercy could not be exercised, and the honor of the Divine government maintained without it, is surprising. Having denied that the sufferings of Christ are in any sense the punishment of the sins of men, or that, they are in any sense penal in their nature, it is singular that they should believe them to be absolutely necessary in order to vindicate the righteousness of God, and cause his government to be respected, so that, without these sufferings as a condition, the mercy of God could not and would not have been exercised in the forgiveness of sin. What! Have men no reason to believe in the righteousness of God, and to respect his moral government, unless they can be convinced of the histojtical fact that he immediately and directly INTRODUCTION. XXXvn jeqts, not upon God himself. Perhaps both.viewi are uiiited in the text, " He made him who knew no sin to sufl^ as a sinner in our behsllf, that we through INTRODUCTION. x£ Mm might attain the righteousness wMch God wil accept." * I have preferred, for obvioas considerations, to diis- cuss the subject in the light of Smpture rather than of mere reason. But in regard to the sufficiency of the governmental theory to satis'fy the reason, I cannot forbear quoting a few lines from a recent Orthodox writer, the author of the Sermon on the Atonement in the Monthly Religious Magazine, which has re- ceived some attention among us. " How could the suffering of one human being, either in amount, or as an expression of God's feelings towards his law, sin, and holiness, be equivalent to the eternal punishment of the wicked, to the smoke of their torment ascend- ing for ever ? The suifering of one created being for a few days or years would be, in comparison, as a drop tO' an ocean We are quite familiar with the answer which is made to reasoning of this kind^ — with the argument, that the union of the Divine na- ture with the human gave a boundless dignity and worth to the sqafferings of that human nature, though having no part in them. But we are constrained to say, thast it never commended itself to. our judg- ment, or ga've us the least satisfaction. We cannot see how thC' Divine natfcure had, we think we see that it bad not, any share in the aionementi- if it had no sbaxe in the saeriftce which comtitated U;. nor how it could- give dignity and worth to sufferings by which it was enMrel^ mtaffected. We have heard! illustration after illustration upon this point ; but to our mind it is Kke sailing in the face of the wind." f These re- marks are the plain dictates, of common sense. I have » ^^__^__„________^___.^^^ * 2 Cor. V. 21. t See the Ne*Bnglandfer for July, 1847, p-. 432^ d* Xlii INTKODUCTION. no doubt that the time will come when the doctrine that a clear perception of the righteousness of God absolutely depended on the sufferings " of the man Christ Jesus during only thirty years, or rather during the last three years of his life," * will be regarded with greater wonder than the doctrine of Luther and Fla- vel and John Norton now is. There are some other differences of opinion among New England theologians, which it will be sufficient only to mention. Thus, while some limit the suffer- ings necessary for the atonement to the death of Christ, others take in those of his whole life. Again, while some suppose his sufferings to have been only such as were inflicted by the instrumentality of man, and arose naturally out of his peculiar circumstances and character, others regard his chief sufferings as miraculous, inflicted by the immediate hand of God, independent of those inflicted by human instrumen- tality. There is also a great difference of opinion among the New England theologians as to what constituted the atonement. Even among those who have rejected the doctrine of the imputed righteousness of Christ, some make the perfect obedience of Christ a constitu- ent part of it; others not. Dr. Dwight and some recent writers have maintained, with much earnest- ness, that the obedience of Christ is an essential part of it. But Dr. Jonathan Edwards the younger, who seems to be followed by the majority, writes : " I venture to say further, that not only did not the atone- ment of Christ consist essentially in his active obe- dience, but that his active obedience was no part of his atonement, properly so called, nor essential' to it." | * Edwards the younger. See Works, Vol. n. p. 43. t Works, Vol. II. p. 41. INTRODUCTION. xlui On the other hand, the most distinguished New England writer in the Baptist denomination, Dr. Way- land, has expressed the opinion, that the perfect obe- dience of Christ was all that was essential to the atonement. " In what manner did Christ's appearing on earth have any effect upon our moral relations ? To this various replies have been presented. It has been said that his unparalleled humiliation, or his lowly and painful life, his bitter death, were of the nature of a suffering of the penalty of the law. I, however, apprehend that this explanation has not al- ways been satisfactory to those who have borne in mind the character of the law which we have violated, and the awful holiness of the Being against whom we have sinned. Besides, the sufferings of Christ, considered by themselves, were not severer, nor was his death itself more excruciating, than that of many martyrs, confessors, and missionaries His obe- dience had been so transcendent in virtue, he had so triumphantly vanquished all our spiritual enemies, and put to shame all the powers of darkness, that I know not whether anything more was demanded. ' The Lord was well pleased for his righteousness' sake ' [his obedience], for he had magnified the law and made it honorable. That this was the case would seem prob- able, because there is no reference in the Scriptures to his suffering after death." * There is also a difference of opinion among New England theologians as to the question whether the Divine, or only the human, nature of Jesus suffered and died. Thus a recent writer, the Rev. Mr. Dutton, whose Sermon on the Atonement has been thought worthy of being repubHshed in the Boston Monthly * Wajland's University Sennons, pp. 147, 160. xliv nfTBODtrCTION. Religioasf Magazine, maintains the former opinion, — an opinion which, strikes me as not only unchristian, but atheistic in its tendency. In the language of Paul, it changes " the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made hke to corruptible man." ■ It is but just to say, however, that this view has found very few advocatesi All the distinguished New England theologians, such as Hopkins, Edwards the younger, Dwight, Emmons, Woods, and others, Hmit the sufferings of Christ to his human nature.* Nor has a different opinion ever found its way, so far as I know, into the confession of faith of any church in Christendom. John Norton undoubtedly gave the orthodox or generally received opinion on this point when he wrote, " The second person of the Trinity, together with the Father and the Holy Ghost,. did infiiet the torments of hell upon the human na- ture." f The dissertations selected from: the Commentary on St. Paul's Epistles by Mr. Jowett are those which were thought to be most suitable for publication in this volume. I should have been glad to insert two other dissertations from the same work ; namely, that on Natnial Religion, and that on the. Compar- ison of St. Paul with Philo. But the former, in set- ting aside some of the usual proofs of the- existence of the Deity, did not appear to me to contain such explanations and qualifications as might maJce it usefnl to readers unacquainted with the writer's philosophy. The latter was omitted because, though learned and valuable, it was not likely to be useful to persons un- aiGqn^mnted with the Greek language. * See pag&jtxY*. t Sarton'sAnswel-to Pynchdn, p. 122. INTRODUCTION. Xlv Several yaiuable Essays have been selected from the recent Commentary on the Epistles to the Corin- thians, in two octavo volumes, by the Rev. Arthur P. Stanley, Canon of Canterbury, who is somewhat known in this country by his Life of Dr. Arnold. His work on the Epistles to the Corinthians manifests the same scholarship and independence, united with rev- erence, which distinguish the Commentary by Pro- fessor Jowett. The closing Essay on the Credibility of Miracles, by Dr. Thomas Brown, the distinguished author of the well-known Lectures on the Philosophy of the Human Mind, has been for some time out of print. It appears to me to meet the objections of Mr. Hume in a far more satisfactory manner than they have been met by most writers on the subject. It cannot escape the notice of the reader, that very few of the Essays in this volume were written by pro- fessed Unitarians. Most of them are by eminent divines and scholars of the Church of England. But in the circulation of books the great question should be whether they contain true and just views, and not by whom they were written. That we have been able to select so large a voliome of Essays on very important subjects from writers of the Established Church of England in harmony with the views of Unitarians, is a fact highly encouraging in regard to the progress of truth, and at the same time highly creditable, not only to the independence of the writers, but to the practical freedom which at present prevails in that church. No one of them, I believe, has yet incurred any higher penalty on account of his publica- tions than that of rewriting his name. It is to be Xlvi INTEODIJCTION. hoped that the results to which several of the learned writers have arrived, notwithstanding the natureil bias arising from their ecclesiastical connections, will se- cure for them, from diiferent classes of readers, that candid and attentive consideration which their impor- tance demands. The voice which comes from this volume is the united utterance of Episcopalians, Lu- therans, and Unitarians. Caxbridge, May 7, 1856. ESSAYS. FAITH AND SCIENCE* By M. GUIZOT. One of the questions which theology has oftenest debated, — the foremost, perhaps, at least in the sense that it serves for a prologue to all others, — is the eternal antithesis of rea- son and faith. From the powerlessness of reason and the necessity of faith, certain writers make the point of departure and the termination of their works. The same idea at this time inspires and fills almost entirely a multitude of religious writings, whose object is to invoke faith, 'not to regulate, but to oppress, the reason. I shall not pretend to treat this ques- tion in all its extent, as it involves the entire problem of hu- man nature and knowledge. I wish, in fact, rather to investi- gate the real and natural acceptation of the word faith, so powerful and so mysterious, and exercising such a different empire over the soul of man, sometimes illuminating, and sometimes misleading it ; — here, the source of the most won- derful actions ; there, the veil thrown over the basest designs. I wish to ascertain if, according to plain language and the common thought of mankind, there is, in reality, that oppo- sition and incompatibility which certain writers endeavor to institute between faith and reason, between science and faith. Such an examination is, perhaps, the best means of solving * Translated in Kitto's Journal of Sacred Literature, Vol. V., New Series, from Meditations et Etudes Morales, par M. Guizot. 2de Edition, Paris. 1 2 FAITH AND SCIENCE. the question which lies concealed under these terms, — of ob- taining from them, at least, glimpses of the solution. No one can doubt that the -wovA faith (foi) has an especial meaning, which is not properly represented by belief {croy- ance), conviction {conviction), or certitude (certitude). Cus- tom and universal opinion confirm this view. There are many simple and customary phi-ases in which the word faith {foi) could not be replaced by any other. Almost all lan- guages have a specially appropriated word * to express that which in French is expressed by foi, and which is essentially different from all analogous words. This word, then, corresponds to a certain state of the hu- man soul; — it expresses a moral fact which has rendered such a word necessary. . We commonly understand by faith (foi) a certain belief of facts and dogmas, — religious facts and dogmas. In fact, the word has no other sense when, employing it absolutely and by itself, we speak of the faith. That is not, however, its unique, nor even its fundamental sense ; it has one more extensive, and from which the relig- ious sense is derived. We say : " I hav^e full faith in your words; this man has faith in himself, in his power," &c. This employment of the word in civil matters, so to speak, has become more frequent in our days : it is not, however, of modern invention ; nor have religious ideas ever been an exclusive sphere, out of which the notion, and the ■word, faith, were without application. It is, then, proved by the testimony of language and com- mon opinion, first, that the word faith designates a certain interior state of him who believes, and not merely a certain kind of belief; that it proceeds from the very nature of con- viction, and not from its object. Secondly, that it is, however, to a certain species of belief — religious belief — that it has been at first, and most generally, applied. * In Greek vofil(eiVy marevfLv ; in Latin, sententia, fides ; in Italian, credmza, fede ; in English, jfei'tA, belief; in German (if I mistake not), glauben. FAITH AND SCIENCE. 3 Thus, the sense of the word has been special, in fact and in its origin, although it is not fundamentally so ; or rather, the occasion of the employment of the word has been special, although its sense is not so. It would but be a fact without importance, and sufficiently common in the history of the formation of languages and ideas, if the true and general sense of the word faith was reproduced entire in its special employment ; but it has been otherwise. The specialty of the usual acceptation of the word has profoundly obscured the general sense ; the true notion ot faith has undergone an alteration under the notion of religioits faith. And from this disagreement between the historical senses, so to speak, and the philosophical sense of the term, have resulted the obscurity of the moral fact which it expresses, and the greater part of the errors to which it has given place. • In truth, the words which express an interior disposition, a certain state of the human soul, have almost always a fixed and identical sense, which is independent of the interior object to which the disposition refers, and of the external cause which produced it. Thus, men love different objects ; — they have contrary certitudes ; — but the words love, certitude, in ordinary language and common life, do not less preserve, always and for all, the same sense ; their general acceptation remains and prevails, whatever be the specialty of their em- ployment ; and the passions, interests, and errors of those who make use of them do not want, nor have they the power, to alter it. The destiny of the word faith has been different. Almost exclusively applied to religious subjects, what changes its sense has undergone, and still undergoes every day ! Men who teach and preach a reUgion, a doctrine, or a re- 1 tious reformation, in making their appeal with all the energy of the freed human spirit, produce in their followers an en- tire, pro ound, and powerful conviction of the truth of their doctrine. This conviction is called faith ; neither masters nor disciples, nor even enemies, refuse it this appellation. 4 FAITH AND SCIENCE. Faith, then, is but a profound and imperious conviction of a religious dogma ; it matters but little whether it has come in the way of reasoning, or controversy, or of free and liberal investigation : that which characterizes it, and gives it a claim to be called faith, is its energy, and the dominion it exercises, by this title, over the entire man. Such has been at all times — in the sixteenth century for example — the faith of great reformers and their most illustrious disciples, Calvin after Luther, and Knox after Calvin, &c. The same men have presented the same doctrine to persons whom they were not able to convince by methods of reason- ing, examination, or science, — to women and to multitudes in- capable of long reflection : they have made their appeals to the imagination, to the moral affections, and to the suscepti- bility of being moved and of believing through emotion. And they have given the name of faith to the result of this work, as to that of a work essentially intellectual, of which I spake just now. Faith has become a religious conviction which was not acquired by reasoning, and which took its rise in the sensuous faculties of man. This is the idea which" mystic sects attach to faith. The appeal to man's sensuous nature, and the resulting emotion, have not always sufficed to bring forth this faith. Other sources have then been appealed to. They have en- joined practices, and imposed habits. It is absolutely neces- sary that a man should, sooner or later, attach ideas to his actions, and that he should attribute a certain meaning to that which produces in him a certain effect. The practices and habits have conducted the mind to the beliefs from which they themselves were derived. A new faith has appeared, which has had for its principal and dominant characteristio submission of the mind to an authority invested with a right to regulate the thoughts whilst governing the Hps. In short, neither the free exercise of the intelligence, nor the sentiment, nor practices, have elsewhere succeeded in producing faith. We have said that it is not communicated, and that it is not in the power of man to give it, nor to ac- FAITH AND SGIEKOE. 5 quire it by his own peculiar endeavors ; that it demands the interposition of God, — the action of grace ; — grace has become the preliminary condition, and the definitive charac- teristic of faith. Thus by turns the vrori faith expresses : — Istly. A conviction acquired by the free labor of the hu- man mind. 2dly. A conviction obtained by means of the sensitivity (sensiUtiti), and without the concurrence, often even against the authority, of the reason. 8dly. A conviction acquired by the very submission of the man to a power which has received from on high the right to Command. 4thly. A conviction wrought by superhuman means, — by divine grace. And according as the one or the other of these different faiths, if we may so speak, has prevailed, religion, philosophy, government, and the whole of society have been observed to vary, simultaneously and by a necessary correspondence. How has the same word been able to subserve so many different, and even contradictory acceptations ? What is that mysterious fact which presents itself to minds under such different aspects ? Has the necessity of legitimating the fun- damental principle, and the system of the government of dif- ferent religious beliefs, alone caused the variation of the notion o{ faith? or rather, do all these definitions correspond, on some one side, with that state of the human soul ; and have they no other irregularity than that of being partial and exclusive ? These are questions which cannot be solved, so long as men persist, as they have done to this day, in characterizing faith by its causes, or its external effects. It is in itself that the fact must be considered ; we must search out what is the state of mind where faith reigns, independently of its origin and its object. Two kinds of beliefs co-exist in man : — the one, which I will not call innate, -^ an inexact and justly-debated expres- 1* 6 FAITH AND SCIENCE. sion, — but natural and spontaneous, which germinate and establish themselves in his mind, if not without his knowl- edge, at least without the co-operation of his reflection and will, by the development solely of his nature, and the in- fluence of that external world in the midst of which his life is spent. The others, laborious and learned, the fruit of voluntary study, and of the power which a man has, whether to direct all his faculties towards an especial object with the design of knowing it, or of reflecting upon himself, and of perceiving that which passes within him, and of giving himself an account of it, and thus of acquiring, by an act of the will and reflection, a science which he possessed not before, although the facts which it has for its object subsist equally under his eyes, or within him. That there is moral good and evil, and that man is bound to avoid the evil, and to fulfil the good, — this is a natural, prim- itive, and universal belief. Man is so constituted that it de- velops itself in him spontaneously, by the course merely of his life, from the first appearance of the facts to which it must . apply itself, very long before he could know himself, and could be able to know that he believed. Once originated, this belief acts on the soul of man almost as the blood circulates in his veins, without his willing it, and without his thinking of it. The greater part of mankind have never given it a name, nor formed for themselves a general and distinct idea of it : it does not, however, the less subsist in them, revealing itself every time that the occasion presents itself, by an action, a judgment, or a simple emotion. Human morality is a fact which does not stand in need of human science to throw light upon it. Like every other fact, this also can become a matter of science. The moral being beholds itself, and studies itself: it renders account to itself of the principle of its actions, judg- ments, and moral sentiments : it assists at the spectacle of its own nature, and pretends not only to know, but to govern it, according to its acquired knowledge. Naturally and sponta- neously, belief in the distinction of moral good and evil thus FAITH AND SCIENCE. 7 becomes reflective and scientific. Man remains the same ; but he was self-ignorant, and acted simply according to his nature ; nevertheless he knows himself, and his science pre- sides over his action. This is but an example ; I could cite a thousand others of the same kind. Man carries within himself a multitude of beliefs of which he has the consciousness, but not the science ; which external facts awaken in him, though they have never been the chosen objects and the special aim of his thoughts. It is by behefs of this kind that the human race is enlightened and guided ; they abound in the spirit of the most meditative philosophy, and direct it oftener than the reflective convictions to which it has arrived. Divine wisdom has not deUvered over the soul and life of man to the hazards of human science ; it has not condemned it to expect all its intellectual riches from its own proper work. It is, — it lives ; that is enough : by this sole title, and by the progressive development of this fact alone, it will possess lights indispensable for guiding its life, and for the accompUshment of its destiny. It can aspire higher ; it can elevate itself to the science of the world, and of itself; and, by the aid of science, can exercise over the world and itself a power analogous to creative power. But then it will be required that it should only build on the prim- itive foundation which it has received from Providence ; for just as all natural and spontaneous belief can become scien- tific^ so all scientific conviction received its source and its point of support in natural belief. Of these two kinds of behef, which merits the name of It appears, at first sight, that this name agrees perfectly with natural and spontaneous beliefs ; they are exempt from doubts and disquietude ; they direct man in his judgments and actions with an imperial authority which he does not dream of eluding or contesting ; they are natural, sure, practical, and sovereign. Who does not recognize in all this the character- istics of faith ? Faith has in effect these characteristics ; but it has also 8 FAITH AND SCIENCE. others which axe wantmg to natural beliefs. Almost unknown by the very man whom they direct, they are for him, in a certain way, as external laws, which he has received, but not appropriated, and which he obeys by instinct, but without having given to them an intimate and personal assent. They suffice for the wants of his life ; they guide, warn, urge on, or restrain him, but without, so to speak, his own concurrence with them, and without awakening within him the sentiment of an interior, energetic, and powerful activity ; and without procuring for him the profound joy of contemplating, loving, and adoring th% truth which reigns over him. Faith has this power. It is not science, stUl less is it ignorance. The mind which is penetrated by it has never, perhaps, rendered, and perhaps never will render, an account of the idea which has obtained its faith ; but it knows that it believes it ; it is before it, present and living ; it is no longer a general belief, a law of human nature, which governs the moral man, as the laws of gravity govern bodies ; it is a personal conviction, a truth which the moral individual has appropriated to himself by contemplation, by free obedience and love. From that time this truth does much more than suffice for his life ; it satisfies his soul ; and still more than directing, it enlightens it. It is surprising how men live under the dominion of this natural belief that there is moral good or evil, without our being able to say that it has their faith ! It is in them as a master to whom they belong and whom they obey, but without seeing him, and without loving or rendering him homage. That any cause whatever, revealing, so to speak, the consciousness to itself, should draw and fix their regards upon this law of their nature ; that they acknowledge and accept it, as their legiti- mate sovereign ; that their understanding should honor itseli in contemplating it, and their liberty in obeying it ; that they should conceive of their soul, if I may so speak, as a hearth where truth concentrates itself to spread from thence its light, or as the sanctuary. wherQ God deigns to dwell ; all this is more than simple and natural belief, — it is faith. The difference between these two states of the soul is so FAITH AND SCIENCE. 9 Tfeal and so profound, that it has been at all times, and still is, one of the principal sources of the diversity of religions and the division of churches. The one is principally applied to spread, or to maintain, general beliefs, fixed and incorporated, in some way, in the habits and practices of life : in short, analogous, by the mode of their influence, to those irreflective and almost instinctive beliefs whereof God has made the moral condition of the human race. The others have had, above all, to awaken for the heart and in the soul of each individual, a personal and intimate belief, which should give him a lively feeling of his own intellectual activity and liber- ty, and which he might consider as his own peculiar treasure. The former have marched, so to speak, torch in hand, at the head of nations ; the latter have sought to place "within each man movement and light. Neither the one nor the other tendency ever could become exclusive ; there have been facts, beliefs profoundly individual in religions, which least of all provoke their development ; there are, also, men governed by general and legal beliefs, external, in some sense, to their soul, in religions the most favoraWe to the interior life of the individual. It is not the less true, that, at all times, one or the other of these tendencies has ruled in various religions ; and not only in various religions, but, by turns, in the same religion at various epochs of its existence ; so that the difier- ence of the two corresponding states of the sOul, and the character of that to which truly the name of faith belongs, are clearly imprinted in the history of humanity. Reflective and scientific beliefs, on the contrary, have this •in common with Mth, that they are profoundly individual, and give a lively feeling of interior and voluntary activity. Nothing belongs more to the individual thap his science ; he knows where it commenced, and how it has become enlarged, and what means and efforts have been used to acquire it ; -and what it has added, so to speak, to his intellectual worth, and to the extent of his existence. But if, by that means, scientific beliefs are nearer to faith than natural and irreflfr "tivB beliefs, yet, on other 'sides, lihey remain much farther 10 FAITH AND SCIENCE. removed from them, and from the first they are confined to doubt and uncertainty. They measure, and almost admit, various degrees of probability ; and even when they are con- fident of their legitimacy, they do not deny that they can be modified, and even overturned, by a wider and more exact science ; — whilst the most entire and immovable certitude is the fundamental characteristic of faith. All science is felt to be bounded and incomplete ; every man who studies, what- ever be the object of his study, however advanced and as- sured he himself may be of his own knowledge, knows that he has not reached the boundary of his career, and that for him, as for every other, fresh efforts will lead to fresh progress. Faith, on the contrary, is in its own eyes a complete and finished belief; and if it should appear that something yet remains for it to acquire, it would not be faith. It has noth- ing progressive, — :- it excludes all idea that anything is want- ing, and judges itself to be in full possession of the truth which is its object. From thence proceeds a vast inequality of power between the different kinds of conviction ; faith, ■freed from all intellectual labor and from all study, (since, so far as knowledge is concerned, it is complete,) turns all the force of. its possessor towards action. As soon as he becomes penetrated by it, only one task remains forTiis accompUsh- ment, — that of causing the. idea which has taken possession of his faith to reign and to be realized without. The history of religions — of all religions — proves, at each step, this ex- pansive and practical energy of beUef, with which the char- acters of faith have been converted. It displays itself even on occasions when in no way it appears provoked or sustained by the moral importance or the visible grandeur of results. I could cite a singular example of it. In the course of our Revolution, the theoretical and actual superiority of the new system of weights and measures quickly became for some men, who were the subordinate servants of an administration charged with establishing it, a complete and imperious truth, to which notliing could be objected, added, or refused. They pursued from that time its triumphs with an ardor, an obsti- FAITH AND SCIENCE. 11 nacy, and sometimes a prodigious devotion. I have known a public officer, who, more than twenty years after the birth of the system, and when no one scarcely dreamed of disturb- ing himself any more about it, gave himself up, day and night, to extraordinary labors, letters, instructions, and verifi- cations, which his superiors did not demand, and which he had often great trouble in causing to be adoptefl, in order to accelerate its extension and strength. The new system of weights and measures was for this man the object of a true faith ; he would reproach himself for his repose, whilst any- thing remained to be done for its success. Scientific beliefs, even when they would admit of immediate applipation, rarely carry a man so to struggle against the outer world as to re- duce it under his dominion. When the human mind is, above all, preoccupied with the design or the pleasure of knowledge, it there concentrates, and, so to speak, exhausts itself; and there remain for it neither desires nor powers to be otherwise employed. Scientific beliefs, accustomed to doubts, to gi'oping in darkness, and to contempts, hesitate to command : without efforts and without anger, they make their appeals to igno- rance, uncertainty, and even error, and scarcely know how to propagate themselves, or to act, but by methods which con- duct to science ; that is to say, by inciting to meditation and study, they proceed too slowly to be able to exercise outward- ly an extensive and actual power. Perhaps, also, the very origin of scientific beliefs might be counted amongst the causes which deprive them of that em- . pire, and that confidence in action and command, which is the general characteristic of faith. It is to himself that man owes his science ; it is his own work, the fruit of his own labor, and the reward of his own merit. Perhaps, even in the midst of the pride which such a conquest often inspires, a secret warning feehng comes over him, that, in claiming and exercising authority in the name of his science, it is to the reason and the understanding of one man that he pretends to Bubjugate men, — a feeble and doubtful title to great power ; and .which, at the moment of action, can certainly, without 1'2 FAITH AND SCIENCE. their own consciousness, cast into the soul of the proudest some timidity. Nothing Uke this is met with in faith. How- ever profoundly individual it is, from the time it has entered into the heart of man, it signifies not by what means, it ban- ishes all idea of a conquest which can be his own, or of a discovery the glory of which he can attribute to himself. He is no longer occupied with himself ; whoUy absorbed by the truth which he beUeves, no personal sentiment any longer raises itself with his knowledge, excepting the sentiment of the happiness it procures for him, and of the mission it im- poses upon him. The learned man is the conqueror and the inventor of his science ; the believer is the agent and thf servant of his faith. It is not in the name of his own su- periority, but in the name of that truth to which he has yielded himself, that the believer claims obedience. Charged to procure for it sovereignty, he bears himself, in reference to it, with a passionate disinterestedness ; and this persuasion impresses upon his language and upon his acts a confidence and authority, with which the proudest science would in vain endeavor to invest itself. Let us consider how different is the pride which is produced by science, from that which accom- panies faith : the one is scornful and fiiU of personality ; the other is imperious and full of bUndness. The learned man isolates himself from those who do not comprehend what he knows ; the believer pursues with his indignation or his pity those who do not yield themselves to what he believes. The first desires personal distinction ; the other desires that all should unite themselves under the law of the master whom be serves. What can this variety of the same fault import, excepting that the learned man beholds himself, and reckons himself,- in his science, whilst the behoving man forgets and abdicates himself in favor of his faith ? It is further necessary to explain how the same idea, the same doctrine, can remain cold and inactive in the hands of the learned man, and with- out any practical use even in men whose understanding it has illuminated ; whilst, in the hands of the beUever, it can be- come communicative, expansive, and an enei^etic principle of action and power. fAITH AND SCIENCE. 33 ■ Faith does not, then, enter exclusively either' into the one or the other of these two kinds of beliefs, which, at first sight, appear to share the soul of man. It partakes of, and at the same time difiFers from, natural and scientific beliefs. It is, like the latter, individual and particular : Uke the former, it is firm, complete, active, and sovereign. Considered in itself, and independent of aU comparison with this or that analogous condition, faith is the full security of the man in the possession of his belief; a possession freed as much from labor as from doubt ; in the midst of which every thought of the path h'y which it has been reached disappears, and leaves no othei sentiment but that of the natural and pre-established harmony between the human mind and truth. As soon as faith exists, all search after truth ceases ; man considers himself to have arrived at his object ; his belief is no longer for him anything but a source of enjoyments and precepts ; it satisfies his un- derstanding and governa his life, bestows upon him repose, and regulates and absorbs, without extinguishing, his intellect- ual activity ; and directs his liberty without destroying it. Is he disposed to contemplation ?■ his faith opens an ilhmitable field for his thoughts ; they can run over it in aU directions, and without fatigue, for he is no longer vexed by the ne- cessity of reaching the object, and discovering the path to it; he has touched the boundary, and has nothing more to do but to cultivate, at his leisure, a world which belongs to him. Is he called to action ? He throws himself wholly into it, sure of never wanting impulse and guidance, tranquil and animated, urged on and sustained by the double force of duty and passion. For the man, in short, being penetrated by faith, and within the sphere which is its object, the under- standing and the will have no more problems to solve, and no more interior obstacles to surmount : he feels himself to be in the full possession of 'the truth for enlightening and guiding him, and of himself for acting according to the truth. But if such is the state of the human soul, ii' faith differs essentially from other kinds of behef, it is evident at the same time that neither natural nor scifentifie beliefs baVe anything 14 EAITH AND SCIENCE. which excludes faith ; that both one and the other can invBst their characters with it ; and, further still, that either one or the other is always the foundation on which faith supports itself, or the path which leads to it. See a man in whom the idea of God has been nothing but a vague and spontaneous belief, the simple result of a course of life and of external circumstances, — an idea which holds a place in his mind and conduct, but on which he has never fallen back and fixed his intellectual regards, and which he has never appropriated to himself by an act of voluntary and briefly-sustained reflection. Let any cause whatsoever — as a great danger or sorrow — strike him with a powerful emo- tion, and present to him the misery of his condition and the weakness of his nature, and awaken .within him this need of superior succor, — this instinct of prayer, often lulled to sleep, but never extinguished in the heart of man. All at once the idea of God, till then abstract, cold, and proud, wiU appear to this man, Uving, urgent, and particular ; it has attached itself to him with ardor, — it will penetrate into all his thoughts, — his belief will become faith ; and Pascal will be borne out when he said, " Faith is God sensibly realized by the heart." Another has lived in submission to religious practices, with- out having associated with them any truly personal convic- tion; as an infant, others might make a law for him; as master of himself, he has retained the habit of obedience, docile to a fact rather than attached to a duty, and not dream- ing of penetrating farther into the sense of the rule than to verify its authority. A time has arrived when occasions and temptations to offend against this law have presented them- selves ; a contest has arisen between the habits and tastes, between the desires, and, perhaps, the passions. What this person could practise without thought has now become a sub- ject of reflection, anxiety, and inward sorrow. To preserve its empire, it becomes necessary that the rule, until then mis- tress only of the exterior life of the man, should penetrate and establish itself within his soul. It has succeeded in that ; FAITH AND SCIENCE. 15 and to remain true to his practices, he has been required to make sacrifices for tliem ; and fee has made them. The state of his soul is changed : habit is converted into conviction ; practice into duty ; and observance into moral want. In the day of trial, the long submission to a general rule, and to a power clothed with the right to prescribe, has brought forth a particular and individual adhesion of thovght and will, — that is to say, what was wanting to faith! For scientific beUefs this transition to the state of faith is more difficult and more rare. Even when, by meditation, rea- soning, and study, any one has attained to conviction, he re- mains nearly always occupied with the labor which has con- ducted to it, his long uncertainties, the deviations by which he has been misled, and the falge steps he has made. He has arrived at his object, but the remembrance of the route is present to him, with all its embarrassments, accidents, and chances. He has come into the presence of light, but the impression of the darkness, and the dubious lights he has crossed, are yet present to his thoughts. In vain his convic- tion is entire ; there are yet to be discovered traces of the labor which has presided over its formation. It wants sim- plicity and confidence. There is a certain fatigue connected with it, which enervates its practical virtue and fruitfulness. He finds trouble in forgetting and overthrowing the scafibld- ing of the science, in order that the truth, of which it is the object, may wholly belong to his nature. We might say, the butterfly is restrained by the shell in which it was born, and from which it is not fully disengaged. Nevertheless, although the difficulty is great, it is not in- surmountable. More than once, for the glory of humanity, man, by the force of his inteUigence and scientific meditations, has reached to beliefs, to which there has been wanting none of the characteristics of faith, — neither fulness nor certainty of conviction, nor the forgetfulness of personality, nor expan- siveness and practical power, nor the pure and profound enjoyments of contemplation. Who would refuse to recognize in the belief of the most illustrious Stoics in the sovereignty 16 FAITH AND flOIENCK- of moral good, — in CleantheS, Epictetus, and Marcus Aure- lius, — a true faith ? And was not the religious faith of the principal Reformers, or Reformed, of the sixteenth century, Zwingle, Melancthon, Duplessis Momay, the fruit of study and science, as well as the philosophical doctrines of Descartes and Leibnitz ? And lately, under the idea that falsehood is the source of all the vices of man, and that at no price, in no moment, and for no cause, can it be necessary to swerve from the truth, did not Kant arrive, by a long series of medi- tations, to a conviction perfectly analogous to faith? The analogy was such, that the day when his certainty of the prin- ple became complete and definite constituted an epoch in his memory and life, as others call to mind the event or the emo- tion which has changed the condition of the soul ; so that, dating from that day, according to his own testimony, he lived constantly in the presence, and under the empire, of this idea ; just as a Christian lives in the presence, and under the em- pire, of the faith from which he expects salvation. Reflective and scientific beliefs can be converted into faith : the difiiculties of the transformation are much greater, and the success much more rare, than when natural and sponta- neous beliefs are concerned. Nevertheless, the transforma- tion of science into faith can be, and sometimes is, accom- plished ; and if more frequently science stops far short of faith, it is not because there exists something opposed and irreconcilable in their natiire, but because faith is placed at the boundary of that course which science is not in a con- dition wholly, and of itself, to accomplish. Nevertheless, it is easy, if I mistake not, to observe the fault of these theories which I enumerated at the commence- ment, and which men and the world so ardently dispute. It is their fundamental error, that they have not regarded faith in itself, and as a special state of the human mind, but in the mode of its formation. They have been thus induced to assign for its essential and exclusive characteristic such and such origins, from which it is possible that faith may be de- rived, not admitting it as legitimate, however, or even real, FAITH AND SCIENCE. l7 but when it had a certain especial power ; and rejecting and denying all faith when derived from a different source, al- though it should place the soul of man in the same disposition, and produce the same effects. It is true that faith often re- ceives its origin from an emotion, as the mystics contend ; but it is also produced by submission to authority, as the Roman Catholic doctors with reason say ; and also from reflection^ science, and a full and free exercise of the human under- standing, although both the one and the other refiise their assent to this. In his liberal wisdom, Grod has offered more than one way for arriving at that happy state when, tranquil at length in the possession of his behef, man dreams of noth- ing but of enjoying and obejdng what he regards as the truth, lliere is faith in knowledge, since it has truth for its object ; and man can reach it by the faculties which he has received for knowing. There is also love in faith ; for man cannot see the fulness of truth without loving it. The sensuous faculties and the emotions of the soul are sufficient to engender faith. In short, in faith there are respect and submission ; for truth commands, at the same time that it charms and enlightens. Faith can be the sincere and pure submission to a power which is regarded as the depository of truth. Thus the va^ riety of the origins of faith, of which human pride would make a principle of exclusion and privilege, is a benefit be- stowed by the Divine wiU, which, so to speak, has placed faith within reach of all, in permitting it to take its origin froni each of the moral elements which constitute faith, — namely, knowledge, submission, and love. As for those who, rejecting every kind of explanation and origin of faith merely human, will see nothing in it but the direct and actual interposition of God and especial grace, their notion, if apparently more strange, is at bottom more natural ; for it touches the problems which do not belong to man to solve. In the external and material world, when a powerful, sudden, and unexpected phenomenon appears, which, at a stroke, changes the face of things, and seems not to at- tach itself to their ordinary course, nor to explain itself by 2* IS FAITH AND SCIENCE. their anterior state, man instantly refers it to a real and par- ticular act of the will of the Master of the World. The presence of God can alone explain for man that which strikes his imagination and escapes his reason ; and where science and experience cannot reach, there he assigns an especial and immediate act of God.- Thus the thunderbolt, the tempest, earthquakes, vast floods, concussions, and extraordinary revo- lutions of the globe, have been taken for signs and eifects of the direct action of God, up to the time when man has dis- covered for them a place and an explanation in the general course of facts and their laws. The same want and the same inclination rule man in the ideas he has formed about the in- terior world, and the phenomena of which he liimself is the theatre and the witness. When a great change and moral revolution have been accomplished in his soul, when he per- ceives himself to be illuminated by a light, and warmed by a fire, hitherto unknown, — he has taken no notice of the myste- rious progress, the slow and concealed action, of ideas, senti- ments', and influences which were probably for a long time preparing him for this state. He cannot attribute it to an act of his own will ; and he knows not how, so to speak, to trace back the course of his interior hfe for the purpose of discov- ering its origin. He refers it, therefore, to a divine will, special arid actual. Grace alone could have produced this revolution in his soul, for he himself did not make it, nor does he know how it was produced. The birth of faith, above all when it proceeds from natural and irreflective beliefs which pass, without the intervention" of science, to this new state, often bears this character of a sudden revolution, unforeseen and obscure for him who undergoes it. It is, then, very plain that the idea of the direct interposition of God has been in- voked on this occasion. In the sense which people have com- monly attributed to this idea, it withdraws itself and retires, here as elsewhere, before a more attentive study and a more complete knowledge of facts, their connection, and their laws. We are led to acknowledge that this state of the soul, which is called faith, is the development — differently conducted, FAITH AND SCIENCE. 19 Bometunes sudden and sometimes progressive, but always natural — of certain anterior facts, with which, although essen- tially distinct, it is connected by an intimate and necessary tie. But supposing this recognized, and faith thus conducted to the place which belongs to it in the general and regular course of moral phenomena, a grand question always remains, the question lying hid at the bottom of the doctrine of grace, and which indirectly this doctrine attempts to solve. In ceasing to see God in the tempest and thunder, narrow and weak minds figure to themselves that they shall no more meet with him, and that they shall nowhere any more have need of him. But the First Cause hovers over all second causes, and over all facts and their laws. When all the secrets of the universe shall have unveiled themselves to human science, the universe will yet be a secret to it ; and God appears to withdraw himself from before it, only to invite and constrain it to elevate itself more and more towards himself. In the science of the moral world the same thing happens. When people shall have ceased every moment to invoke grace, and grace alone, to explain faith, it will always remain to be learnt what power presides over the life of the soul ; how truth reveals itself to man, who is un- able either to seize or reject it, according to his own will ; from whence comes that fire whose heai'th is evidently ex- ternal to himself; what relations and communioatiotis exist between God and man ; what, in short, in the interior life of the human soul, is the share of its own activity and freedom, and what it must attribute to that action which proceeds from without, and to that influence from on high which the pride or the levity of the human mind endeavors not to know. This is the grand problem, the problem that presents itself the moment we touch that point where the things of earth and man are joined to that higher order on which man and the earth so clearly depend. The doctrine of grace is one of the attempts of the human mind to solve it. The solution, at least in my opinion, is beyond the limits assigned to human knowledge. I have endeavored to determine with precision what faith 20 FAITH AND SCIENCE. is in itself, independently of its object ; I have laid down the characteristics of this state of the soul, and the different paths by which man can be conducted to it, whatever may be, so to speak, its materials. By this means we may be able to suc- ceed in ascertaining the true nature of faith, and in bringing it into clearer light, disengaging from every foreign element the moral fact concealed under this name. I hasten to add, nevertheless^ that this moral fact is not produced indifferently in all cases ; that all human beliefs, whether natural or scien^ tific, are not equally susceptible of passing from the condition of faith ; and that, in the vast field where human thought is exercised, there are objects especially calculated to awaken a conviction of this kind, to become materials for faith. This is a fact which is attested even by the history of the word, and which I noticed at the beginning ; its common ac- ceptation is also special. At first sight, it seems to be exclu- sively consecrated to religious belief; and although it lends itself to other uses, and although, even in our own days, its sphere seems to be enlarged, it is evident that, in a multitude of cases where it is concerned (for example, with geography, botany, technology, &c.), the word faith is out of place ; that is to say, the moral state to which this word corresponds is not produced by such subjects. As faith has its peculiar interior characteristics, so it has also its exterior necessary conditions ; and it is distinguished frond other modes of beUef of man, not only by its nature, but by its object. But what arO the conditions, and what is the external sphere, of faith ? Up to a certain point we can determine and catch glimpses of them, from the very nature of this state of the soul, and its effects. A belief so complete, so accomplished, that all intel- lectual labor seems iio have reached its termination, and that man, wholly .united with the truth of which he thinks himself to be in possession, loses all thought of the path which has conducted him to it, — so powerfiil, that it takes possession of tihe exterior activity, as well as of tlie human mind, and makes FAITH AND SCIENCE. 21 submission to its empire in all things a passionate necessity, as well as a duty, — an intellectual state, which can be the fruit, not only of the exercise of the reason, but also of a powerful emotion, and of a long submission to certain prac- tices, and in the midst of which, when it has been once de- veloped, the three grand human faculties are actively em- ployed, and at the same time satisfied, — the sensibility, the intelligence, and the wiU ; — such a condition of soul, and such a belief, demand in some sort occasions worthy of it, and must be produced by subjects which embrace the entire man, and put into play aU his faculties, and answer to all the demands of his moral nature, and have a right, in turn, to his devoted- ness. Intellectual beauty, and practical importance, appear then, & priori, to be the characteristics of the ideas proper for becoming the materials of faith. An idea which should pre- sent itself as true, but at the same time without arresting by the extent and the gravity of its consequences, would produce certitude ; hut faith would not spring from it. And so prac- tical merit — the usefulness of an idea — would not suffice for begetting faith ; it must also draw attention by the pure beauty of truth. In other words, in order that a simple beUef, natur^ or scientific, should become faith, it is necessaiy that its ob- ject should be able to procure the pleasures of activity, as well as of contemplation, that it may awaken within the double sentunent of its high origin and power ; in short, that it should present itself before man's eyes as the mediator between the moral and the ideal world, — as the missionary charged with modelling the one on the other, and of uniting them. Facts fully confirm these inductions, drawn from the mere nature of the moral phenomenon I am studying. Whether we regard the history of the human race, or whether we penetrate into the soul of the individual, we see faith through- out applying itself to objects in which the two aforesaid con- ditions are united. And if sometimes the one or the other of these conditions is wanting, — if) on some occasions, the 22 FAITH AND SCIENCE. object of faith should appear in itself denuded of ideal beauty or practical importance, — we may hold it for certain, that it is not so in the thought of the believer. He will have Boon discovered, from the truth which is the object of his faitli, consequences and applications which for others are obscure and distant, but for him clear and infallible. Before long his ideas, which appear to have but one aim and one useftil merit, will be elevated in his mind to the rank of a disinterested theory, and will possess in his eyes all the dignity and all the charm of truth. It is possible that the believer is deceived, and that he exaggerates the practical worth or intellectual beauty of his idea ; but even his error, agreeing in this with the reason and experience of the whole human race, is but a new proof of the necessity of these two conditions for the production of faith. We can understand, however, why the name oi faith is almost the exclusive privilege of religious beliefs : these are, in fact, those whose object possesses in the highest degree the two characters which excite the development of faith. Many scientifie notions are beautiful and fruitful in their applica- tion ; political theories may forcibly strike the mind by the purity of their principles and the grandeur of their results ; moral doctrines are yet more surely and generally invested with this twofold power ; and either has often awoke faith in the soul of man. Nevertheless, in order to receive a clear and lively impression, sometimes of their intellectual beauty and sometimes of their practical importance, there is almost always required a certain amount of science, or sagacity, or, at aU events, a certain turn of public manners and the social state, which are not the portion of all men, nor of all times. Religious beliefs have no need of any such aids ; they carry with themselves, and in their simple nature, their infallible means for effect. As soon as they penetrate into the heart of man, however bounded in other respects may be the develop- ment of his intelligence, however rude and inferior may be his condition, they wiU appear to him as truths at once sub- lime and common, which are applicable' to all the details of FAITH AND SCIENCE. 23 his earthly existence, and open for him those high regions. and those treasures of intellectual life, which, without theii light, he would never have known. They exercise over him the charm of truth the most pure, and the empire of interest the most Mwerful. Can we be astonished that, as soon as they exist, their passage to the state of faith should be so rapid, and so general ? There is yet another reason more hidden, but not less decisive, and which I regret I can only refer to ; — the object of religious beliefs is, in a certain and large measure, inacces- sible to human science. It can verify their reality; it can reach even to the limits of this mysterious world, and assure itself that there are facts to which the destiny of man infaUibly attaches itself; but it is not permitted to reach these facts themselves, so as to submit them to its examination. Struck by this impossibility, more than one philosopher has concluded that there was nothing in them, since reason could perceive nothing, and that religious beUefs address themselves but to the fancy. Others, blinded by their impotence, have tardily sprung forward towards the sphere of superhuman things, and, as though they had succeeded in penetrating into it, have described facts, solved problems, and assigned laws. It is difficult to say which mind is the most foolishly proud, that which maintains that what it cannot know is not, or that which pretends to be capable of knowing all that is. What- ever may be the case, neither the one nor the other assertion has ever obtained for a single day the avowal of the human race ; its instinct and practices have constantly disavowed the nothing of the inca-edulous, and the confidence of theologians. In spite of the first, it has persisted in believing in the exist- ence of an unknown world, and in the reality of those rela- tions which hold mankind united to it ; and notwithstanding the power of the second, it has refused to admit that they have attained the object, and lifted the veil ; '"and it has con- tinued to agitate the same problems, and to pursue the same truths, as ardently and laboriously as at the first day, and as if nothing had yet been done. 24 FAITH AND SCIENOB. See, then, what, in this respect, is the situation of man. Natural and spontaneous religious beliefs are produced in him, which, by reason of their object, tend at once toward? the state of faith. They can arrive at it by means foreign to reasoning and science, — by the emotions and by practices ; and the transition is often thus actually brought about. One other way appears open before man. Religious beliefs natu- rally awaken within him the want of science, which not only desires to render an account of them, but aspires to go much fai-ther than they can conduct it, to know' truly this world of mysteries, of which they afford it glimpses. Oftentimes, though, if I mistake not, wrongly, it flatters itself it has suc- ceeded ; and thus theology, or the science of divine things, is formed, which is the origin of that rational and learned faith, of which so many illustrious examples do not permit us to contest the reality. Often, also, man, by his own confession, fails in his enterprise ; the science which he has pursued after resists his most skilful endeavors, and then he falls into doubt and confusion, — he sees those natural and irreflective beliefs darkened, which served him for his starting-point; or, in fact^ despairing of the variety of his attempts, and always tor- mented by the want of that faith which he has promised him- self to establish by science, he returns to his early beliefs, and requires of them to conduct him to faith, without the help of science ; that is to say, by the exaltation of his sensuous faculties, or by submission to a legal power, the depository of the truth, which his reason cannot seize. Theology itself, from the moment when it announces itself as a science of the relations of God with man and the world, and presents to the human mind its solutions of the religious problems which besiege it, proclaims nothing less than that these problems are impenetrable mysteries, and that this science is interdicted to human reason ; and that faith, bom of love, submission, or grace, is alone able to open the under- standing to truths, which, however, theologians undertake to reduce to systematic doctrine, in order to be able to teach or demonstrate them to the reason. To sucl) an extent does a FAITH AND SCIENCE. 25 feeling of the powerlessness of human science, in this matter, remain imprinted upon him in fact ; although everywhere man appears to boast himself of having escaped it. Thus, also, is explained that obscure physiognomy, if I may so express myself, which appears to be inherent in the word faith, and which has so often made it an object of a kind of distrust and dislike to strict and free minds. Frequent above all within the religious domain, and there oftentimes invoked by the powerful and learned, sometimes for the purpose of making up for the silence of the reason, and sometimes for the purpose of constraining the reason to be silent, faith has been considered only under this point of view, and judged only after the employment to which it lends itself on this occa- sion. People have concluded that this belief was essentially irrational, blind, and the fruit of ungoverned imaginations ; or else imposed by force, or fraud, on the weakness or ser- viUty of the mind. If I have truly observed and described the nature of that which bears the name of faith, the error is evident. On the contrary, faith is the aim and boundai-y of human knowledge, the definite state to which man aspires in his progress towards truth. He begins his intellectual career with spontaneous and irreflective beliefs ; at its termi- nation is faith. There is more than one way — but none certain — for leaping over this interval ; but it is only when it has been leaped over, and when belief has become faith, that man feels his nature to be fully satisfied, and gives him- self up wholly to his mission. Legitimate faith, that is to say, that which is not mistaken in its object, and addresses itself really to the truth, is then the most elevated and most perfect state to which, in its actual condition, the human mind can arrive. But faith may be illegitimate ; it may be the state of mind which error has produced. The chance of error (experience at every step proves it) is here even much gi'eater, as the paths which lead to it are more multiplied, and its effects more powerfuL Man may be misled in his faith by-feehngs, habits, and the empire of the moral affections, or of external circumstances, as well as by the insufllciency or 3 26 FAITH AND SCIENCE. the bad emplciyment of his intellectual faculties ; for faith ca talie its origin from these different sources. And, neverth less, from the time of its existence, faith is hardy and an bitious ; it aspires passionately to expand itself, to invade, rule, and to become the law both of minds and facts. Ai not only is it ambitious, but bold ; it possesses and display for the support of its pretensions and designs, an energ address, and perseverance, which are wanting to almost s scientific opinions. So that there is in this mode of belief, fi more than in any other, chance of error for the individus and chance of oppression for society. For these perils the] is but one remedy, — liberty. Whether man believes, or act his nature is the same ; and to avoid becoming absurd ( guilty, his thought stands in need of constant opposition ai constraint, as well as his will. Where faith is wanting, thei power and moral dignity are equally wanting j where hberl is wanting, faith usurps, then misleads, and at length is los Let human beliefs pass into the state of faith ; it is the natural progress and their glory ; and in their effort towan this object, and when they have reached it, let them constan ly continue under the control of the free intellect ; it is tl guaranty of society against tyranny, and the condition their own legitimacy. In the coexistence and mutual respe of t^,ese two forces reside the beauty and the security social order. THE LAW AND THE GOSPEL. Bt tbe Eev. BADEN POWELL, M. A., F. B. S., F. G. S., SAVILIAN PB0FES60R OP OEOMETRT IN THE DHITERSITY OP OXPOED. 'O yap Xpumavtanoc ovk eis 'lovSalaiiov cniariva-ev aWa lau- .fiatcru^ff ets Xpurriavia-fioVj as naaa yXwaaa TviffTewatra €is Qeov (rmir\-)(6ri. ^- Ignatius ad Magnes. § x. "For Christianitj hath not believed in Judaism, but Judaism in Christianity ;^ that every tongue having believed in God might sound forth together." * iNTEODtrCTION. Among persons professing to receive the Bible as the au- thentic record of what in general they believe is Divine Reve- lation, it is remarkable how little attention is commonly given to the obvious diversity of nature and purport in those very distinct portions of which flie sacred volume consists. To any one who does but for a moment reflect on the widely remote dates, the extremely diversified character of the contents, the totally dissimilar circumstances and occasions of the composition, of the several writings, it must be ob- vious how essentially they require to be viewed with care- ful discrimination as to the variety of conditions and objects which they evince, if they are to be in any degree rightly understood, or applied as they were intended to be. But jnanifest as these considerations are, and readily admitted * I should translate the last clause of this quotation, " that every tongue having believed might be gathered together unto God." — .G. E. N. 28 THE LAW AND THE GOSPEL. when simply put before any reader of the most ordinary attainments, and discernment, it is singular to observe how commonly they are practically lost sight of in the too preva- lent modes of reading and applying Scripture. In this point of view it must be allowed a matter of the most primary importance, as bearing on the whole purport and design of the Bible, to apprehend rightly the general relation, but at the same time the characteristic differences, of the Old and New Testament, the Law and the Gospel, the distinctive character to be traced and the sort of connection actually subsisting between them. Nor does this turn on con- siderations of any nice or critical kind, demanding extensive learning to appreciate, or deep study to judge of; it implies a mere reference to matters of fact, which require but to be indicated to be understood, so that it is the more remarkable how commonly they are overlooked. Yet on no subject, perhaps, are more confused and unsatis- factory ideas more commonly prevalent ; not only among or- dinary, careless, or formal readers of Scripture, but even among many of better information and more serious religious views, a habit is too general of confounding together the con- tents of aU parts of the sacred volume, whether of the old or new dispensations, of the Hebrew or of the Christian Scrip- tures, into one promiscuous mass, regarding them, as it were, all as one book, or code of rehgion, and of citing detached texts from both, and promiscuously taking precepts and insti- tutions, promises and threatenings, belonging to peculiar dis- pensations, and applying them universally, without regard to times, persons, or circumstances. And such a mode of appeal- ing to Scripture is sometimes even defended, as evincing a meritorious reverence for its divine character, and upheld as a consequence from the belief in its inspiration. Yet in whatever sense that belief be entertained, adopting even the strictest meaning of the term, it surely by no means follows but that inspired authority may have a reference to one ob- ject and not to another, — a precept or declaration may have been addressed to one party or in one age, and not designed THE LAW AND THE GOSPEL. 29 for another, — without any disparagement to its divine char- acter. From a thoughtless, desultory, or merely formal habit of reading the divine Word, it is not surprising that there should result an adoption of those low and unworthy notions which prevail so commonly as to the character and genius of the Christian religion ; and which especially arise from the con- fused combination of its principles with those of older and leas perfect dispensations. That such ideas should obtain ready acceptance with the many will not surprise those who con- sider the various causes in different ways ope'rating to lower and degrade the exalted purity and simplicity of the Gospel to the level of the corrupt apprehensions of human nature, especially among the mass of the ignorant and unthinking nominal professors of a belief in its doctrine. But it must be a matter of more astonishment that such notions should find encouragement with some who professedly look at Christianity in a more enlightened sense, and avowed- ly seek to receive it in no blind, formal manner, but in the spirit of its evangelical purity. Yet such unhappily is the case. And whether from mere want of thought "on the one hand, or from preconceived theories on the other, or even in some cases (we must fear) from more mixed motives, so un- prepared are men to entertain more distinct views, that the very announcement of them is commonly altogether startling and even painful to their prepossessions, and especially when these questions are found to be mixed up with certain points of supposed practical obligation and religious observance ; it follows, that when a more explanatory view of the subject is presented, the hearers too generally turn away with impa- tience, or even with disgust and offence. Without indulging the hope of being able to remove or conciliate such opposing feelings in all instances, it will be at least the endeavor, in the following exposition, to avoid giving offence by the assumption of a polemical tone ; yet to state the case of Christianity as independent of previous dispensa- tions, simply in reference to the matter of fact, with that plain- 3* 30 THE LAW AND THE GOSPE-L. hess which the cause of truth demands, according to the tenor of the evidence furnished by Scripture, and in the desire to maintain and elucidate the pure and enlightening principles of the New Testament, according to what appears, at least to the author, their unadulterated and evangelical simplicity. I. The Primeval Dispensations. The general nature, character, and connection of the suc- cessive divine dispensations recorded in the' Bible, as briefly described by the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews (i. 1), - — the announcements in various measures and " portions," and under various " forms " or " aspects," * made in tiAes past to the fathers by the prophets, — fully accords with what we collect in detail from the writings of the Old Testament, and affords the only simple and satisfactory clew to the inter- pretation of them. The view presented to us is that of successive revelations^ systems, covenants, laws, given to diiferent individuals, fami* lies, or nations, containing gi'adual, progressive, and partial developments of the truth, and intimations of the Divine will for their guidance, accompanied with peculiar positive insti- tutions, adapted to the ideas of the age and the condition of the parties to whom they were vouchsafed. Thus peculiar revelations are represented as having been made — each distinct from the Other, though in some instances including repetitions — • to Adam, to Noah, to Job, to Abra- ham, to Isaac and Jacob, to the IsraeUtes, first- by Moses, afterwards by a succession of prophets, as well as in some instances to other people; as, for example, to the Nine- vites (if the book of Jonah be regarded as historical) ; — while, in contradistinction to all these, we are told, " in these last days Crod hath spoken unto us by his Son " (i5.), in a universal, permanent, and perfect dispensation ; — the earlier and more partial were not made " to us," or designed "for tis." Yet it is important to trace the history and character of * This is clearly the force of the original, iroXu^fpSs Km TroKvTpoTrai. Heb. i. 1. THE LAW AND THE GOSPEL. ' 31 these former dispensations, in order more fully to elucidate the distinct nature and independence of the last ; and espe- cially to remove prevalent misconceptions from a subject which, however plain when historically and rationally con- sidered, has been involved in much difficulty from gratuitous and often visionary theories. When we consider the very imperfect mtimations, often mere hints and allusions, given in the Hebrew records, as to these early religious institutions and the design of them, as well as the obvious and wide differences in the circumstances of those people and times from our own, the discerning reader at once sees how little they can have been intended to be understood as containing any permanent elements of a uni- versal religion, as seems to have been sometimes imagined. In the plain terms of the narrative we discover nothing of the kind, and in the conmient on it which the- New Testament BuppUes, we have direct assurance to the" contrary. In general, we find only that the servants of God in those ages were accepted in walking each according to the lights vouchsafed to him ; while in other respects we see peculiar institutions and announcements specially adapted to the pecu- liar ends and purposes of the dispensations. Thus we trace from the first the approach to God through saci-ifices, offer- ings, and formal services. Some infer from the account of the Divine rest after the creation, that there was a primeval institution of the Sabbath, though certainly no precept is recorded as having been given to man to keep it up. But since, from the irreconcilable con- tradictions disclosed by geological discovery, the whole narra- tive of the six days' creation cannot now be regarded by any competently informed person as historical* the historical character of the distinction conferred on the seventh day falls to the ground along with it. Yet even without reference to * I do not here pretend to enter on the evidence in support of this con- clusion. It will be found fully discussed in my work, On the Connection of Natural and Divine Truth, 1838, and in my article " Creation," in Kitto's Cydapadia of Bib. Lit. 32 THE LAW AND THE GOSPEL. this consideration, some of the best commentators have re- garded the passage as proleptical, or anticipatory. Afterwards we find the distinction of clean and unclean animals introduced, and the prohibition of. eating blood, in the covenant with Noah (Gen. ix. 1), of» which the Sabbath formed no part ; nor can we find any indication of it in the history of the other patriarchs : a point particularly dwelt upon by the early Christian divines, who adopted the belief of the Jews of their age in interpreting their Scriptures.* Some have dwelt on the mention of the division of time by weeks t in several parts of the early Mosaic history: yet * Justin Martyr {Dial. c. Trypho, 236, 261 ) says, " The patriarchs were justified before God not keeping Sabbaths," and " from Abraham originated circumcision and from Moses the Sabbath," &c. Irenseus (IV. 30) and Tertullian {Ad Jud., 11. 4) both declare that " Abraham without circumcision and without observance of Sabbaths believed in God," &c. t The early and general adoption of the division of time into weeks may be obviously and rationally derived from the simple consideration, that among all rade nations the first periodical division of time which obtains is that of lunar months, while those conspicuous phenomena, the phases or quarters of the moon, correspond to a week nearly enough for the common purposes of such nations. The universal prevalence of this division by Vi-eoks among Eastern nations from a very remote period is attested by vaiious ancient writers. Dio Cassius ascribes the invention of it to the Egyptians, and assigns the origin of the planetary names of the days. ( Hist. Rom., XXXVII. 18, 19.) Oldendorf found it in the interior of Africa. {Jalm, Archoeol. Bib., \Tt. " Week.") The Brahmins also have the week distinguished by the planetary names. {Life of Galileo, 12 ; Laplace, Precis de I'Hist. d'Astron. 16.) The Peruvians divide lunar months into halves and quarters, i. e. weeks, by the phases of the moon, and besides have a period of nine days, the approximate third part of a lunation : thus showing the com- mon origin of both. (Garcilasso, Hist, of the Incas, in Taylor's Nat. Hist, of Society, I. 291, 292.) So also the Romans had their "Nundinae." On the other hand, the Mexicans have periods of five and of thirteen days, with names to each day. (Norman on Yucatan, i. 85, and Trans, of American Ethnog. Soc, I. .58. ) And the week is not known to the Chinese, nor to the North Ameri- can Indians (Catlin, II. 234) ; facts opposed to the idea of any universal primitive tradition. Allusions to a sanctity ascribed to tlie seventh day by the early Greek THE LAW AND THE GOSPEL. 33 it by no means follows that, because the historian adopts a particular mode of reckoning, it was therefore used by the people of whom he is writing : but were it so, this would not imply the institution of the Sabbath. In all the early dispensations religious truths are conveyed under figures, and obligations enforced by motives, specially adapted to the capacities and wants of the parties addressed. Thus temporal prospects are always held out as the immediate sanctions-; and the mode of announcement adopted is always that in which God is represented as vouchsafing to enter into a covenant with his creatures ; — the form is always that of a poets, such as the e^boimrrj fi* eWeiTO KaTTjXvSev Upov r^iap of Homer, and like expressions of Callimachus, Hesiod, &c., arc quoted by Clemens Alexandrin. (Strom., V.), and expressly described by him to have been derived from the Jews, with whose Scriptures so many parallelisms are found in the classic authors. Generally, however, the universal superstition of the sacredness of the number 7, combined with the equally common propensity to attach sanc- tity to particular periods and days, are sufficient elements out of which such ideas would naturally take tlieir rise. Among the ancient Romans festivals were held in honor of Satum, with a reference to commemorating the Satumian or Golden age, and with this idea it was unlawful on the day sacred to Satum to go cut to war (Macrobius, Lib. I.; Saturn., c. 16), and it was held unlucky to commence a journey or undertake any business : a superstition alluded to by TibuUus {Eleg. I. 3, v. 18), " Satumi aut sacram me tenuisse diem." What particular feast is here referred to there is nothing to show. The supposition of some of his commentators, that it meant the seventh day of the week, is wholly gratuitous. But if it were so, the idea would be naturally and obviously bon-owed from the Jews, whose customs, espe- cially the Sabbath, are so frequently alluded to by the Roman writere ; and, from their wide dispersion, must have been generally familiar, as iu fact we learn from the boast of Josephus {Adv. Ap., II.) and of Philo, that " there is no place where the Sabbath is hot known," and the testi- mony of Theophilus Antiochus (Lib. II., Ad Arist.) to the same effect, as well as others often cited : which show the strict preservation of the ob- j sei-vance among the scattered Jews ; and it may possibly have been con- 1 formed to by others, or the occasion laid hold of as convenient for other purposes : as, e. g., we are told by Suetonius (Lib. XXXII.), "Diogen grommatieus disputare sabbatis Khodi solitus." 34 THE LAT?- ANt) THE GOSPEL. stipulation of certain conditions to be fulfilled, tod c6rtala blessings or punishments to be awarded as they are fulfill or not ; — and these conditions, always of a precise, formal, positive kind, not implying merely moral obligation^. The spirit of aU these covenants was that of " touch not, taste not, handle not" (Col. ii. 21), involving a ground and inotive 6f obedience precisely adapted to the very infancy of the human race. Such was the very covenant with Adam in Paradis6 : " Eat not of the tree, — or thou shalt die." Nor can it be denied that, if the Sabbath had formed a part of that covenant, it was an institution exactly in keeping with it : Eat not of the tree, — keep holy the seventh day. The same idea of a covenanted stipulation of positive observances, in which sacri- fice was the most prominent, characterizes all the succeeding announcements, — from the covenant of circumcision with Abraham down to the more detailed and complete scheme df the Mosaic Law. In these early and impeffect dispensations it is idle to look for any great principles of universal moral application, as has been sometimes fancied : — for instance, finding authority for capital punishment in the precept given to Noah (Gen. is.. 6), or for tithe's in the example of Melchisedec (Gen xiv. 20). So far from perceiving any support for the idea, tha;t because a precept or institution was from the beginning, it was there- fore designed to be of universal and perpetual obligation, on the contrary, We rather see in its very, antiquity a strong pre- sumption that it was of a nattiiie suited and intended only i&t the earliest stage of the religious development of man. But apart from these peculiarities, we trace all along the announcement of " the promise " (Gal iii. 19), which was before the covenant, and to which the fathers looked as not transitory. Christianity, by fulfilling the promise, supersedes 8,11 previous iiiaperfect dispensations : itself emphatically a New covenant, the very reverse of a recurrence to a primitive religion (as fancied by some). The patriarchs, and especially Abraham, are set forth as exafiiples oi fcdth in the promise; and iii this respect CbriStito \M.ipfiv. THE DOCTUINE OF INSPIRATION. 1 Holy Scripture was developecl, must still less have felt a desire to give any extension to the doctrine of Inspiration. Tlie Scholastics, when they treat of any principle of theologi- cal science, certainly give expression to tlie idea that the latter has a principle different from philosophy, — - the revelatio laid down in Holy Scripture ; but into the question concerning the extent of its inspiration, they do not, at least more closely, enter. Expressions marked by liberality transpire even dur- ing these dark times. Thus Bishop Junilius,* in the sixth century, to the question, " How is the authority of the sacred books to be considered ? " returns the aiiswer, " Some are of perfect authority, some of partial authority, and some of none at aU." Amongst the second class (those of partial au- thority) he included the book of Job, the books of Chi'oni- cles, Ezra, and others ; and amongst the last class (those of no authority whatever), those which are properly Apocryphal. In the ninth century, Agobard, Archbishop of Lyons, writes : " What absurdity will follow if the notion is maintained, con- cerning the Prophets and Apostles, that the Holy Spirit in- spired them not only with the sense of their predictions, and the forms or arguments of their phraseology, but also that he fashioned in their lips the very words themselves bodily and outwardly." t In the works of the Greek Catholic expositor Euthymius Zigabenus, in the twelfth century, the following words are found upon Matt. xii. 8 : " It is not to be wondered at if one Evangelist relates this, and the other passes by that; for they did not write down the Gospels immediately from the lips of Christ, so as to be able to give a perfect impression of all hia words, but many years after he had spoken. And since they were men, they were liable to omit many things through for- getfulness. This will explain to you how one may have re- corded what another may have omitted. Oftentimes they have made large omissions, simply for the sake of brevity ; some- times because they thought the matter to be unnecessary." *.De Fardbus Div. Legis, 1. 8. t Adv. Fredegisum, c. 12. 76 THE DOCTRrS'E OF INSPIRATION. The Scholastic theology introduced a distinction between what directly, and what indirectly, belongs to faith ; a distinc- tion which is pertinent to our subject, and may also serve as a basis for a theory of inspiration. "Those things belong directly to faith," says Thomas Aquinas, in the thirteenth cen- tury, " which to us are pre-eminently of Divine origin, as, that God exists in a Trinity of persons ; and to hold a false opinion concerning these is the very cause of heresy. On the other hand, things belonging to faith indirectly, are those from which follows anything contrary to faith, as if, for ex- ample, any one should assert that Samuel was not the son of Elkanah ; for from this it would follow that the Scripture is false." * From the interest here mentioned there arises also, amongst ourselves, ever afresh, the practical need of an unexception- able and uniform inspiration of the Scripture. How this need is to be judged of will be the subject to be handled in our second part. Here the language of the gi-eat Church Father just quoted (Aquinas), may only serve as a testimony that the religious consciousness in man, when it reflects upon itself, makes a distinction between the several parts of Scripture, agreeably to which the necessity also for its inspiration is a mediate or an immediate necessity. Besides, the Scholastics, in contending for the exclusion of all error, have been so far from maintaining strict consistency, that we find at least in Abe- lard a concession of individual doctrinal errors. He says (" Sic et Non," ed. Cousin, p. 11) : "It is certain that the Prophets themselves were at times destitute of prophetic grace, and that in their official capacity as Prophets, while believing that they were in possession of the spirit of prophecy, they de- clared, hy their own spirit, some things that were faUacious ; and this was permitted them in order to preserve their hu- miUty, — in other words, that they might more truly know the difference between themselves as persons receiving Divine assistance, and as relying solely upon the guidance of their * Summa Theol., I Qu. 32, art. 4. (Ed. Antw. 1585.) — Tb. THE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 77 own spirit." He then cites the instance of Peter, who on account of a deviation from the truth had been so severely censured by Paul, and adds : " What wonder is it, therefore, seeing that it is certain that even Prophets and Apostles were not entirely free from error, if amongst so great a number of Church Fathers a few writings appear to have been issued containing mistakes." The Catholic Confession of the Council of Trent has given no more direct explanation of the sense in which the Sacred Scripture is to be considered as divinely inspired than the Lutheran symbols.* In Sessio IV. the canonical writings are mentioned, and it is there only incidentally stated that the Apostles wrote as it was dictated to them by the Holy Ghost.f The opinions of Catholic theologians have so moved between two boundary lines, that by some, in the same man- ner as by the Protestants, the strictest literal inspiration "has been advocated, X while by others inspiration has been re- stricted to those portions only which contain doctrinal matter ; § but the decisive authority of the Church interfered not with their differences. By the most eminent authorities, — the Jesuit Bellarmine, the Dominican Camas, the learned Bon- frere, the jesuitically famous Cornelius h Lapide, and others, revelatio proper was distinguished from divine assistance (assistentia) ; the latter being an influence which kept those from error who wrote by the force of their own minds. || Many amongst them make no scruple in conceding that the Evangelists fall into errors. The celebrated Canus supposes an error of memory in Stephen in the passage Acts vii. IG.IT Erasmus treats in like manner some passages in Matthew. * Creeds. t " Spiritu sancto dictante." t Vide Casp. Sanclhis, Salazar, Huet, and Este. § Antonius de Dominis, Bickard Simon, Henrt/ Holden in the Analysis Fidei, 1685, &c. II Quenstedt, I. ch. 4, p. 67 et seq. ; Rich. Simon, in his Criticisms on the New Test., I. c. 24. 1[ Where Ephron the Hittite is called " Ephron the father of Sichem." Comp. Gen. xxiii. — Te. 7* 78 THE DOCTRINE OF INSPraATION. Maldonatns, in referring to Matt. xxvi. 28, " For this is my blood of the New Testament," &c., declares his belief that the words of the institution of the Lord's Siipper ha.ve been more correctly given by Matthew and Mark than by Luke and Paul.* Antonius dc Dominis judges as follows concern- ing such defects : " Mistakes of this kind, which touch not the substance of the fact, neither do, nor can do, any injury to the faith ; nor do they relate to any portion of the Divine Faith ■which demands belief, but to that which carries with it a knowledge which is merely human, and thought out by the mind."t Sect. 5. — Luiheran and Reformed Divines. The leading dogmatical works of the two Protestant church- es, | the Loci Theohgici of Melancthon, and the Christian Institutes of Calvin, like the symbolical writings . of the Lu- theran Church, propound no doctrine of Inspiration. They convey a general impression of the divinity and credibility of the Biblical wi-itings, and nothing more. With many strong expressions, Luther bears testimony to the Bible as a book whose entire contents are useful and salutary ; § in which are no contradictions ; || and every letter, nay, every tittle, of which is of inore significance than heaven and earth together ; T and so on. And yet he has not hesitated to utter the well- known oifensive declarations concerning the Canon of Holy Scripture. It is true that at a later period he considerably softened down his opinions on these points, but he still freely ascribed to the Scriptures imperfections or logical errors. In his preface to Link en's "Annotations on the first Five Books of Moses," ** he says : " Doubtless the Prophets studied the writings of Moses, and the last Prophets studied the first, and wrote down in a book the good thoughts which the Holy Spirit * Quenstedt, I. ch. 4, p. 75 ; R. Simon, I. p. 185. t R. Simon, I. p. 525. t The Lutheran, and the Reformed or Calvinistic Church. — Tr. 4 Walch, I. 1196. Ibid., II. 1758. II Ibid., Vin. 2140., t Ibid., VIII. 2161. ** Ibid., XIV. 172. THE DOCTRINE OF INSPraATION. 79 excited (vom H. Geiste eingegeben) within them. But allowing that these good, faitliful teachers and searchers of the Scrip- ture sometimes build with a mixture of hay, straw, and stubble, and not entirely with silver, gold, and precious stones, the foundation nevertheless remains unshaken ; as for the other, the fire will consume it" Luther also took the liberty to un- derstand Old Testament words in a sense different from that which is given them as they are explained in the New Testa- ment. This passage from Ipa. viii. 17,18, — " And I will wait upon the Lord, that hideth his face from the house of Jacob, and I will look for him. Behold, I and the children whom the Lord hath given me are for signs and for wonders in Israel," &c — is understood, as quoted by the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews (ii. 13), as a declaration made by Christ ; but Luther, in his Commentary upon Isaiah, explains it as a declaration by the Prophet himself.* Concerning the argument of Paul, conducted on the ground of a typical ap- prehension of the history of Hagar and Sarah,t he frankly declares that it " is too unsound to stand the test, and yet it throws a clear light upon the question of faith." In relation to the sections forming the twenty-fourth chapter of Matthew, and the twenty-first chapter of Luke, where commentators have had much disputation as to what portions refer to the destruction of Jerusalem, and what to the end of the world, he is of opinion that Matthew and Mark have mixed both events together indiscriminately, and do not observe the order which Luke has observed. | According to Genesis xii. 1—11, God first appeared to Abraham in Haran ; according to Acts vii. 2, he had already appeared to him in Mesopotamia. Luther observes upon this : " It appears to me that Moses narrates this history carefully and accurately: not so Stephen, who has only borrowed it from Moses. Now, it often happens that, when one gives a plain, hasty narration of anything, he does nof pay such close attention to all the circumstances, as * "Walch, VI. 121 et seq. t Gal. iv. 22 et seq. t Walch, XL 2496. 80- THE DOCTKIME Ob' INSPIRATION. they must do who wish to write faithfully a history of past occurrences, for the benefit of posterity. Moses is an his- torian : Stephen relies upon the fact "that the history stands written by Moses " [and that hence his hearers, perusing that history, were in no danger of being misled by his cursory detail of facts]. In Gen. xv. 13, the duration of the Egyp* tian bondage is given as four hundred years ; Exod. xii. 40, gives it at four hundred and thirty years ; while Paul, on the contrary, in Gal. iii. 17, following the Septuagint and the Samaritan (Pentateuch) reckons the time from the period when the promise was given to Abraham until the end of the Captivity, at four hundred and thirty. Now, Luther first endeavors, under the guidance of Lyra, by unnatural wrest- ing, to reconcile this calculation of Paul with the text, and then, at Gen. xv. 13, he makes the admission that here the historian " does not very closely and accurately calculate the time." * With him, however, such questions are generally insignifi- cant. Of mistakes in answering questions concerning matters purely historical, he says : " These mistakes are of such a nature as to do no damage to the faith, nor do they prejudice our cause ; concerning Truth alone must we firmly adhere to the Sacred Scripture, and rigidly defend it, while we leave to others things that are darker, to be settled by their own judgments." t Giving his opinion on the book of Job in his " Table Talk," he observes : " This book, excellent as it is, was not written by him (Job), nor concerning him only, but all the afflicted. Job did not actually utter the words ascribed to him ; but his thoughts were such as are there represented. The book unfolds itself before us, both in matter and execu- tion, much after the manner of a comedy, and the strain of its argument is almost that of a, fable." | The same hberal mode of viewing the verbal fidelity and the chronological accuracy of the history, presents itself in i * Walch, XI. 1448. t Ibid., 1089. t CoUoquia, ed, Piankf. 1571, II. 102. THE UOCTKINE OF INSPIIlATiON. 81 Calvin's Harmony of the Gospels. Luke — to give an in- stance — has related that temptation of Christ as second, which in Matthew is the third. Upon this Calvin remarks : " It signifies nothing at all, for it was not the intention of these Evangelists so to weave the thread of history as always to preserve exactly the order of time, hut to collect, as they would present in a mirror or on a tablet, a summary of those things which it is most advantageous for us to know concern- ing Christ." Luke * differs from Matthew t in his manner of stating the command of our Lord concerning that high manifestation of patient endurance, where a man, after being deprived of one garment, yields up again another. Calvin, referring to this, simply observes, " Diverse readings in Matthew and Luke change not the sense." In the Epistle to the Hebrews, chap, xi. 21, the passage found in Gen. xlvii. 81 is quoted accord- ing to the Greek version (Septuagint), % which follows a reading different from the Hebrew text. § Calvin briefly remarks, " "We well know that the Apostles were not, in this matter (of quotation), so very precise ; but in reality there is little difference." Concerning 1 Cor. x. 8, where Paul men- tions twenty-three thousand instead of twenty-four thousand, Calvin says, " It is not a new thing, where it is not intended to present a minute enumeration of individuals, to give a number which substantially approximates the actual truth." Upon Matthew xxvii. 9, he says it is clear that Zechariah must here be read instead of Jeremiah ; and adds, " How the name of Jeremiah crept in here, I confess I do not know, nor am I anxious about the matter." In that candid way does Calvin judge concerning the more external errors of memory. And as to the doctrinal contents of Scripture, he speaks as follows: "Seeing that heavenly oracles are not of every-day occurrence, they obtain complete authority among believers * Chap. Ti. 29. t Chap. v. 40. X Kai irpoaeKvvrjaev cVi to aKpov Tris pd^Sov avTov. § Eng. Vers, from Hebr. : " And Israel bowed himself upon the bed's head." 82 THE DOCTRINE OF rNSPIKATIOlf. only when they prove themselves to have proceeded from heaven, as if the very living words of God themselves are distinctly heard therein." Zuiriglius," in ' treating of the Church Fathers, has given a canon which accords infallibility to Christ alone, so withhold- ing it from the Apostles. These are the words : " It is not true that the writings Of all holy men are infallible ; nor is it true that they do riot err. This pre-eminence must be given to the Son of God alone out of the whole human race." * The immediate followers, also, of the German Reformers, as well as those of the Swiss Reformers, speak of certain imperfections in the Biblical writers, in a manner not con- sistent with very extreme notions of Inspiration. Bugen- hagen, t in the scheme he drew up for haxmonizing the narra- tives of our Lord's passion, rema-rks: "Consider that the Evangelists wrote each for himself what they saw, and often- times while they record what occurred, they are heedless of the order of occurrence." He also takes especial care to expose the errors of the Alexandrine translation (Septuagint), which have sometimes been transferred to the New Testa- ment. Likewise Breuz, upon Rom. ix. 25, % remarks, " that the quotation does not giv^ the true sense of the Old Testament text, but that the pui-port is the same. BuUinger, the Swiss, very ingenuously allows that the sacred penmen were liable to errors of memory. In reference to 1 Cor. X. 8, he writes : " Transcribers easily fall into error in stating numbers ; but sometimes the writers also were led 1»/ treacherous memories into the commission, of mistakes" Castellio, aniothei^ Swiss theologian, complains that Paul, in * Schriften von Usteri und Vogelin, II. 247. t Bugenhagen was a distinguished promoter of the Eefoi-mation in Denmarlc. ~ Vide MQnter's Kirch. Geschichte tou Danemark und Nor- wegen. — Tr. } " As he saith also in Osee, I will call them my people which were not my people ; and tier beloved, which was not beloved." Quoted from Ilos. ii 23. THE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 83 Eom. ix., has not expressed his meaning more fully and openly ; and brings against the Apostle's logic the charge, that it confounds together two comparisons which ouglit to have been kept distinct,* &c. Moreover, after Melancthon, the Lutheran Church had no knowledge of such definitions concerning inspiration as repre- sent it affecting minute details. The " Loci Theologici " of Chemnitz, 1591, leave the dogma of the Holy Scriptures t entirely undiscussed; and even John Gerhard, at the com- mencement of the seventeenth century (1610-25), while indeed in his " Loci Theologici," that most important dogmat- ical work of the Lutheran Church, he has definitions of great strictness upon the authority of Scripture, and its perfection, nevertheless said nothing in his earlier writings upon the subject of its inspiration. % Definitions that go into detail first occur in " Systema Theologicum " of Calovius, § in the second half of this century (1655 - 77). As to what opinions the Eeformed Church adopted on the subject, we may say that its earlier confessions confine themselves entirely to the mere assertion of the inspiration of the Bible as a dogma. The " Formula Consensus Helvetici," which appeared not earlier than 1675, declares in detail concerning the Old Tes- tament: "It is divinely inspired (fleoTrveuo-Tor), equally as re- gards the consonants, the vowels, and even the vowel-points, or at least as it regards the force of the vowel-points, both as to matter and as to words." || To this position most of the divines of the Reformed Church adhere. Inspiration, in the widest extent of the idea, is especially vindicated by the erudite Professor Voetius, of the University of Utrecht, in a * Dial. II. De Electione, pp. 10^, 107, 132. t The dogma conccniing the nature and authority of Scripture. — Tk. } By direction of Dr. Tholuck in a recent communication the transla- tion here varies slightly from the original text. — Te. § Calovius died 1686. It Is said that he daily offered up the petition, " Imple me, Deus, odio haereticorum ! " — Te. II " Turn quoad consonas, turn quoad yocalia, et puncta ipsa, sivo punctorum saltern potestatem, et turn quoad res, turn quoad verba, Ot6nv