Wm 
 
 VOL' 
 
 HI 
 
 £i 
 
THE 
 DOCTRINAL THEOLOGY 
 
 (fongdrai f u%nm €\mt\ f 
 
 VERIFIED FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCES, 
 
 BY THE LATE 
 
 HEINEIOH ISOHMID, 
 
 DOCTOR AND PROFESSOR OF THEOLOGY AT ERLANGEN. 
 
 SECOND ENGLISH EDITION, REVISED ACCORDING TO 
 THE SIXTH GERMAN EDITION, 
 
 BY 
 
 CHARLES A. HAT, D. D., 
 
 PROFESSOR OF HEBREW AND GERMAN LANGUAGES, AND OF PASTORAL THEOLOGY IN 
 THE EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY, GETTYSBURG, PA., 
 
 HENRY E. JACOBS, D. D., 
 
 NORTON PROFESSOR OF SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY IN THE EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN 
 THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY, PHILADELPHIA, PA. 
 
 »YRlG*f7 NS< 
 
 1 JUL 191889 
 
 PHILADELPHIA: 
 
 LUTHERAN PUBLICATION SOCIETY, 
 
 42 NORTH NINTH STREET. 
 
 1889. 
 
^p 6 
 
 (,S 
 
 .s+J, 
 
 % 
 
 Copyright, 1875 and 1889, 
 By CHARLES A. HAY and HENRY E. JACOBS. 
 
TEANSLATOES 7 PEEFAOE. 
 
 The translation of this standard work, first begun by various 
 hands about forty-five years ago, and completed and published 
 by the undersigned in 1875-6, has been used as a text-book in 
 a number of Lutheran theological seminaries in this country. 
 It has been thoroughly revised, and made to conform to the 
 Sixth, and last edition of the original, published in 1876. The 
 changes made by Dr. Schmid were not numerous. They were 
 mostly in the way of condensation, the 566 pp. of the Fifth, 
 being reduced to 491: in the Sixth Edition. A few additional 
 citations were made. We were greatly aided in our revision 
 by the marginal notes of the late Dr. Krauth in the copy used 
 by him in his recitations, as well as by notes from Dr. Loy and 
 Prof. Stellhorn of Columbus, 0., and Dr. Baugher of Gettysburg, 
 who had used our translation with their classes. This work was 
 done by us in common during a summer vacation at Gettysburg. 
 Dr. Jacobs has the responsibility for the addition of a number of 
 notes enclosed in brackets, the desirability of which was sug- 
 gested by the daily use of the book with students for six years. 
 These additional notes will be found chiefly in Christology and 
 Eschatology. In several places it has been deemed an improve- 
 ment to give a fuller presentation of the authorities cited, which 
 Dr. Schmid had abbreviated to answer other purposes than those 
 for which the translation was intended. Such e. g. are the evi- 
 dences for the truth of the Christian religion, pp. 32, sqq., etc. 
 Illustrative matter has also been introduced from other sources, 
 yet with such limits as the preservation of the integrity of the 
 book required. We have omitted all the prefaces, except that 
 of the Second edition which gives the plan of the work, and that 
 of the Third, and the last editions. It is a satisfaction to the 
 translators to know that the former edition of their work was a 
 matter of great gratification to the venerable author, who died 
 at Erlangen, at the age of seventy -four, in the year 1885. 
 
Assured that our former effort has been of substantial service 
 to many of our ministers and stadents, we hope that this new 
 edition may still further advance and deepen the cultivation of 
 the field of the theological science of the Lutheran Church, in 
 which it can justly claim to be facile princeps. No less eminent 
 and accomplished a scholar than Dr. Schaff has stated in the 
 sixth volume of his Church History (p. 26), "The Lutheran 
 Church is a church of theologians, and has most learning." This 
 is exemplified on every page of the present work. 
 
 CHAELES A. HAY, 
 
 Ascension Day, 1889. HENRY E. JACOBS. 
 
PREFACE TO THE SECOND GERMAN EDITION. 
 
 That, after the lapse of three years and a half, a second edition 
 of this work has been demanded, I may perhaps regard as an 
 evidence that I did not at the first undertake a superfluous or 
 useless task. Wherefore I do not think it necessary, upon the 
 appearance of this second edition, to repeat the apology for my 
 undertaking which seemed to be required in the first instance. 
 I cannot, however, refrain from expressing the joy I experience 
 from the fact that my book has found readers. And I may be 
 permitted to give vent to this feeling the more freely, inasmuch 
 as 1 have not here offered the result of my own intellectual la- 
 bors, and inasmuch as the only merit I could claim would be to 
 have faithfully presented the labors of a former age. The recep- 
 tion that my book has met with proves that the necessity of the 
 study of the Old Theology is acknowledged, and I may believe 
 that I have contributed somewhat to render this study easy. 
 This is the accomplishment of my wishes. And I do not there- 
 fore regret having given the book this peculiar character, re- 
 fraining altogether from interlading it with opinions of my own, 
 and endeavoring only to spread the materials before the reader 
 as completely as possible for his own inspection. If I have 
 thereby assigned myself but a humble task, I have at all events, 
 as I may hope, fully accomplished it. It was perhaps fortunate 
 for the book that I composed it at a time in which I was actuated 
 by no other motive than a desire profitably to employ some lei- 
 sure hours. My object Was not to make myself known to the 
 literary public, and hence it was easier for me to conceal myself 
 behind my subject. If something has been accomplished by thus 
 republishing the Old Theology in all its essential features faith- 
 fully and somewhat in extenso (aud this I assuredly believe has 
 been the case), and if I have done this in the proper manner, 
 then I have accomplished my purpose. 
 
 And I have observed, with pleasure and gratitude, that the 
 
6 PREFACE TO THE SECOND GERMAN EDITION. 
 
 majority of the literary journals that noticed my book, judged 
 in according to the design I had in view in its composition. If, on 
 the other hand, I have in certain quarters been so misunderstood, 
 as though it were my opinion that all that is needed to meet the 
 wants of the present day is the immediate adoption of this Old 
 Theology, I may be allowed to stifle my regret that such an 
 opinion should have been entertained rather than to refute it at 
 length. This misunderstanding cannot have sprung from my 
 own statements, for these express nothing more than a profession 
 of adherence to the doctrines of our Church, and of respect for 
 the intellectual effort displayed in the Old Theology. He who 
 adopts the Confession of his Church, however, does not thereby 
 sanction the form of the theological system in which these doc- 
 trines are scientifically developed and displayed, and even the 
 author of " German Protestantism " accords his highest admira- 
 tion "to the amazing diligence with which (at that day) certain 
 departments of Theology, especially Dogmatics and Polemics, 
 were cultivated; to the intellectual acuteness with which all the 
 separate parts of the doctrinal system were developed; to the fine 
 tact which perceived the most distant consequences that would 
 result from the granted premises, in the remotest regions of 
 thought, in the obscurest corners of the extensive edifice of doc- 
 trine; finally, to the magnificent, and, in a certain sense, faultless 
 character of the doctrinal system of the Church, from which fu- 
 ture times may vastly profit," although he " perceives in this 
 running astray of the mighty reformative genius into nothing 
 but bodies of divinity, theological loci communes, manuals of 
 Doctrinal Theology, and lists of controversies, upon the whole 
 a fundamental deterioration of the Protestant Church spirit, 
 which could not fail, in time, to give rise to the most dangerous 
 consequences." If I have therefore not given occasion to this 
 misunderstanding by my own remarks, neither will I be respon- 
 sible for it. As to my scientific attainments, if any one desire to 
 form an opinion concerning them, I must refer him to my late 
 work on " The Syncretistic Controversies in the Days of George 
 Calixtus;" and as to my views in regard to the Old Theology, 
 and the difficulties with which the old Dogmaticians were in- 
 cumbered, they may be ascertained from the dissertation ap- 
 
PREFACE TO THE SECOND GERMAN EDITION. 7 
 
 pended to that work. What I have there said will suffice to 
 show that, although I highly esteem, I do not overestimate the 
 old Dogmaticians, with whom I have been engaged, much less 
 suppose that, in consequence of their labors, all further efforts are 
 unnecessary. 
 
 As my work was favorably received in the form I had orig- 
 inally given to it, I did not allow myself to entertain the idea of 
 arranging it differently in a second edition. And, as no essential 
 defects were pointed out to me by those journals which criticized 
 my work upon the principles according to which it was written, 
 and in reference to the design for which it was written, I con- 
 fined my labor in the preparation of this second edition merely 
 to the careful revision of the text contained in the first edition, 
 and of the selection there made of authorities. That this duty 
 was carefully performed, will be apparent to any one who com- 
 pares the two editions. I refer him particularly to the article 
 on the Freedom of the "Will, on the Communicatio Idiomatum 
 on the State of Humiliation, on Eegeneration and Conversion, 
 and the Sacraments. In the preparation of this second edition, 
 I have also been able to make use of all the volumes of Calo- 
 vius's Systema Locorum Theologicorum. In addition to which 
 there is but one other work from whichl have quoted, which only 
 recently came to hand, viz.; L. flutter's Loci Communes Theoloyici. 
 This work, as is well known, is particularly important, inasmuch 
 as it discusses at length the relation of the strictly Lutheran The- 
 ology to the Melanchthonian, and is further distinguished, from 
 the writings of the other theologians of that day, by giving more 
 information in regard to the history of the development of the 
 particular docrines. To introduce a larger number of theolo- 
 gians 1 did not regard as at all necessary. Those from whom I 
 have quoted, represent with entire adequacy the time to which 
 I had limited myself. If, on the other hand, it has been doubted 
 whether I acted judiciously in adding Hollazius to the number, 
 I must regard this opinion as unfounded. Hollazius stands, it is 
 true, at the extreme limit of the orthodox age, but he neverthe- 
 less belongs in his whole spirit and compass of opinions to that 
 age. And a comparison of the passages, quoted from him in my 
 book, with those taken from the other theologians, will easily 
 
8 PEEFACE TO THE SECOND GERMAN EDITION. 
 
 make it appear that there is not between him and them the least 
 contradiction. As Hollazius is more brief and concise than his 
 predecessors, it was convenient for me to quote the more fre- 
 quently from him, and I did not feel myself bound to renounce 
 this privilege from the fact that his life extended into an age that 
 already began to think differently. Enough, that he did not share 
 the current views of his day. Besides, in the one case, in which 
 Hollazius inclines somewhat towards Pietism, I have taken espe- 
 cial notice of this fact, without, however, going into a discussion 
 of his opinion ; I refer namely to the topic, Of Illumination. 
 
 A further improvement in this second edition is Ad ally this, 
 that in accordance with the wish expressed by some, I have 
 added to the quotations the number of the page where they may 
 be found. But this I did only in the case of the larger works, 
 inasmuch as in the smaller ones the citations are easi]y found. 
 Gerhard I quoted, of course, from Cotta's edition; Calovius, from 
 the edition of 1655-1677, the only one, so far as I know; Hut- 
 ter, according to the edition of 1661; and Quenstedt from that 
 of 1691. 
 
 I now repeat, from the preface to the first edition, some 
 remarks that I desire to present to the readers of the present 
 edition. 
 
 "I said, at the commencement, that I based my representation 
 upon the whole series of theologians, as far as Hollazius. Those 
 who are acquainted with the Old Theology, will approve of my 
 course, in not breaking off with one of an earlier date, and, on the 
 other hand, in not introducing those of a subsequent age. These 
 theologians we must regard as the representatives of Lutheran 
 Theology, and we must take them altogether, if we would have 
 a complete picture of Lutheran Theology. For the theological 
 system was not fully formed by the first who wrote professedly 
 upon the subject, but it wac gradually moulded into the system- 
 atic whole, that now lies fully developed before us. The differ- 
 ence between the earlier and the later theologians of this period 
 does not indeed lie in their doctrinal views, or simply in their 
 method of arranging their materials, but it arises from. the fact 
 that, upon the basis of the fundamental doctrines, the others were 
 gradually and distinctly developed, and finally interlocked in one 
 
PREFACE TO THE SECOND GERMAN EDITION. 9 
 
 harmonious whole. The manner in which this development oc- 
 curred is the following : 
 
 " Melanchthon, who stands first in the series of Lutheran theo- 
 logians, in the first editions of his Loci, discusses only what is 
 peculiar to the doctrine of the Lutheran Church, and even in the 
 following editions he treats everything that does not fall under 
 this head briefly and incompletely. His most celebrated commen- 
 tator, Chemnitz, already aims at more fulness of systematic 
 arrangement ; the articles on God and the Trinity, etc., are 
 already further developed ; he employs with more freedom than 
 Melanchthon the works of the scholastics, especially of John Da- 
 rn ascenus. In Gerhard, finally, this prejudice, which, for other 
 reasons sufficiently known, was cherished against the scholastics, 
 was so far overcome, that, in the articles that had remained un- 
 affected by the errors of the Papacy, the theological discussions 
 of the scholastics were laid under contribution ; the whole repre- 
 sentation of the doctrine of God, his attributes and essence, of the 
 Trinity, of Angels, of the Person of Christ, etc., was based upon 
 the scholastic Theology. But still Gerhard did not carry out his 
 method with uniformity, nor did he thoroughly arrange his mate- 
 rials; some subjects are only hastily sketched, as that of the Work 
 of Christ, or he has merely collected the raw material, as in the 
 subject of the Angels. The following theologians fill up these 
 gaps, and introduce greater uniformity in the mode of treatment. 
 Gerhard still arranges the whole in Loci, and does not allow him- 
 self to reduce it to a system. Calovius first attempted this, by 
 introducing the so-called analytic method, which was subsequently 
 employed by all the theologians down to Hollazius. These theolo- 
 gians, therefore, first reduced Theology to a system. "When these 
 later theologians are accused of having been so much infected 
 with the scholastic fondness for systematizing, as to give to 
 Theology a form too scholastic, I am not prepared altogether to 
 deny the charge ; but when, for this reason, I am blamed for bas- 
 ing my representations partly upon these later theologians, I 
 must enter my protest. The difference between the earlier and 
 the later theologians is not so great as is often asserted. To be 
 sure, the method of dividing the subject, and of distinguishing and 
 subdividing the single dogmatic ideas, which we find in the later 
 
10 . PREFACE TO THE SECOND GERMAN EDITION. 
 
 theologians, is somewhat scholastic, and the method of the earlier 
 writers has the advantage of greater simplicity and ease; but that 
 does not prevent us from paying attention also to the later theo- 
 logians, whose method has the other advantage, of more accu- 
 rately defining the meaning of the single doctrines, and of ren- 
 dering it more difficult for heresy here to screen itself. We ought 
 not, therefore, to esteem it an irksome task to search for the ex- 
 cellent kernel within the unsightly shell. When, however, the 
 charge of scholasticism is brought, as is sometimes the case, 
 against the contents and form of the doctrines themselves, and 
 made to refer to the dialectic development which some particular 
 doctrines received at their hands, we reply, this is a charge which 
 does not lie against the later theologians alone, nay, not even 
 with any peculiar force against them. This is, on the other 
 hand, the method which the theological writers of our Church 
 adopted from the very first, and which they derived from the 
 treatment which the doctrine of the Trinity, e. g., experienced, al- 
 ready in the second period. We mention here only the single topic 
 of the Person of Christ, and the form which Chemnitz already 
 gave to it (in his book, De Duabus Naturis in Christo), to show 
 that the foundation of this form of Theology was laid early 
 enough, and the later theologians only carried out the principles 
 consistently and in all cases. Whether, indeed, these writers did 
 well at the first to strike out this path, is a question that does not 
 belong here. It appears, at all events, from what has been said, 
 that I was not only authorized, but even required, to base my 
 representation upon the whole series of theological writers, down 
 to Hollazius, for they together form a whole ; we find no stopping- 
 place in the midst of this series ; and, when we have once made 
 a beginning with the study of the Theology of the Church, we 
 are irresistibly hurried along from one of these writers to the 
 other. 
 
 "And Hollazius was, moreover, the last theologian whom I 
 could cite; for, without at all discussing the question whether, 
 and in how far, Pietism departed from the principles of Luther- 
 anism, it is perfectly evident that along with it there came a 
 period of doctrinal uncertainty, in which great mistrust was dis- 
 played in regard to the whole previous development, both as to 
 
PREFACE TO THE SECOND GERMAN EDITION. 11 
 
 form and substance. The still later theologians, as, for instance, 
 S. J. Baumgarten, I could of course not employ at all, for who 
 would think of calling theirs an age of orthodoxy? They can, 
 therefore, not appear in a work designed not as a history of The- 
 ology, but as a representation of orthodox doctrine. 
 
 " The doctrinal writers upon whom I have based my represen- 
 tations are, therefore, the following: Melanchthon {Loci Com- 
 munes Theoioyici, 1515), Chemnitz [Loci Theoloyici, ed. Polycar- 
 pus Leyser, 1591), Gerhard {Loci Theoloyici, ed. Cotta, 1762-1781), 
 Hafenreffer {Loci Theoloyici, Tubingen, 1609), Hutterus {Compen- 
 dium Theoloyise, 1610), Calovius (Systema Locorum TJieoloyico- 
 rum, Vit. 1655-77), Konig {Theoloyia Positiva Acroamatica, Rost. 
 1665, Quenstedt {Theoloyia Didactico-polemica, Vit. 1685), Baier 
 {Compendium Theoloyia Positivse, Jen. 1686), and Hollazius 
 (Examen Theoloyise Acroamaticiee, ed. Teller, 1750). 
 
 " These vouchers, it will surely be admitted, represent com- 
 pletely the old Lutheran Theology. And my having omitted 
 many theologians of that age can do no harm, for all that is 
 necessary is that the principal representatives are duly regarded. 
 
 "As to the plan according to which I have treated and quoted 
 these theologians, I have but a few words to say. In the text I 
 have usually presented the separate doctrines in the form in 
 which they appear in the later theologians. I was compelled to 
 do this because I had to reserve the space in the notes for the 
 illustrations; I was authorized to do it, as I consider the consec- 
 utive series of theologians as a whole, in which the earlier ones 
 have their deficiencies supplied and rendered more complete by 
 the latter; but where this improvement has been carried to any 
 great extent, I have not failed to mention it. My principal ob- 
 ject in the notes was to present proof passages, but I also took 
 occasion to observe in them the disagreements, usually of small 
 account, between the authors quoted, and whatever was necessary 
 to be said with regard to their methods of arrangement. 
 
 " In the selection of the illustrations, I did not proceed chron- 
 ologically; I did, indeed, cite from the earlier theologians when- 
 ever it was possible, and usually placed these passages first; 
 especially was this the case with Chemnitz, because his style is 
 the freshest and liveliest; with this exception, however, I selected 
 
12 PREFACE TO THE SECOND GERMAN EDITION. 
 
 those passages which seemed to me most clear and precise, with- 
 out regard to the question whether an earlier writer had simi- 
 larly expressed himself on the same topic. I add this remark 
 for the purpose of guarding against the opinion that in any par- 
 ticular case the writer, whose words I quote, had been the first 
 to view it in the light there represented. Where this is the 
 case, and where it was important that this should be known, I 
 have always expressly mentioned the fact." 
 
 I submit to the learned public this second edition, with the 
 same wish with which I accompanied the first, viz., that my book 
 might contribute something to render the study of the Old The- 
 ology easy, and to incite others to engage in it. Although en- 
 tirely different, and much larger demands must at the present 
 time be made upon a system of divinity, surely no judicious di- 
 vine will deny that a most direct reference must be had, in every 
 such system, to the Old Theology, in which the Confession of the 
 Church has been preserved in unspotted purity, cherished with 
 the most praiseworthy fidelity, and developed and established 
 with the most conscientious diligence, according to the demands 
 of theological science at that day. These estimable qualities in- 
 sure for it a permanent value. It has, indeed, become old, and 
 we call it the Old Theology, but it is not antiquated, and never 
 will become so. And hence the necessity of our still making it 
 the object of our study.' 
 
FROM THE PREFACE TO THE THIRD GERMAN EDITION. 
 
 Both the former editions of my book received, at the hands of 
 the learned Gottingen reviews, such a kind and extended notice, 
 that I feel it to be due to them to state the reasons why I have 
 not, in the new edition, paid special regard to the criticisms there 
 made. The first objection relates to the arrangement of the 
 topics. The opinion is expressed that, in compliance with the 
 modern method of arrangement, I have varied from that of Hol- 
 lazius (which I followed in other essential respects), by placing 
 the doctrine of the Last Things at the end, while Hollazius ap- 
 pended this to the doctrine of the Means of Grace. But I had no 
 reason particularly to follow Hollazius, and can appeal to a still 
 earlier theologian, Quen"stedt, for the place which. I have as- 
 signed to the doctrine of the Last Things. Upon the whole, I 
 believed myself at liberty to select such an arrangement as seemed 
 the most judicious to me, since the theologians differ so widely 
 from one another in this respect that there is no fixed rule upon 
 the subject. 
 
 The learned reviews have further inquired, whether it would 
 not be advisable, "in the case of every principal doctrine, first to 
 give a brief statement of its symbolical basis, and then to refer to 
 its historical development." The former I have done in the case 
 of the leading doctrines, only I have not placed the statements of 
 the symbols in the foreground, which I could not do, if I wished 
 to set forth the doctrinal system according to the method of the 
 old theologians. I was strongly tempted, however, to follow the 
 latter suggestion. But I soon found that if I endeavored to set 
 forth the doctrinal development of all the single doctrines, I 
 would be carried far beyond the limits I had proposed for my- 
 self, and would have to enter upon historical investigations for 
 which I have no special calling. Therefore I applied that method 
 only in the case of especially important doctrines, as in that of 
 Omnipresence, the States of Christ, etc. 
 
PREFACE TO THE SIXTH GERMAN EDITION. 
 
 As but few changes have been made in this sixth edition of 
 my Dogmatik of the Evangelical Lutheran Church, I might 
 have published it without a preface, had not the circumstance, 
 that a period of thirteen years has elapsed since the appear- 
 ance of the fifth edition, led me to suppose that this sixth 
 edition would probably be the last to be published by me. I am 
 prompted, therefore, to add a word of farewell. 
 
 In parting with the book I cannot but express gratitude to 
 God, who has enabled me to attain what I purposed in issuing it, 
 viz. , to furnish the means of acquiring a more intimate acquaint- 
 ance with the old Dogmaticians, as the necessary basis of every 
 system of theology. For that, in the thirty-three years that 
 have elapsed since the publication of the book, it has survived 
 six editions, is surely a proof that the necessity of the study of 
 the old Dogmatik is acknowledged. And this same acknowledg- 
 ment has been reached by our Lutheran brethren in North 
 America ; and it greatly rejoices me that I have been able to 
 serve them also, for I have been agreeably surprised, during the 
 present year, by the reception of a translation of my Dogmatik 
 into the English language (Philadelphia, 1876). That this 
 translation has been welcomed by thirteen Seminaries in North 
 America, bears witness to the fact that in that part of the world 
 also the significance of the old Lutheran Dogmatik is recognized. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 1-13. Introduction, 25-112 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 Of Theology in General. 
 
 2. Meaning of the term — Natural and Revealed — Its Divisions — Its End — Who 
 is a Theologian?— The need of the Holy Spirit, .... 25-30 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 Of the General Subject of Theology, viz., Religion. 
 
 3. Religion, true and false. Characteristics of the true — Proofs for the Chris- 
 tian Religion, 30-35 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 Of the Source of Theology, viz., Revelation. 
 
 4. Revelation — Not Reason — Not Tradition, ..... 36-39 
 
 5. On the Use of Reason in Theology — What is Reason? — Relation of Reason to 
 
 Revelation — Reason before the Fall — Reason since the Fall — Reason not 
 normative — Reason a Handmaid to Theology — Reason useful in its Sphere — 
 Mixed and Pure Articles, 39-49 
 
16 CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 Op the Sacred Scriptures. 
 
 § 6. The terms Sacred Scriptures and Inspiration. Scriptures, the written Word of 
 God — Their twofold origin — Meaning of Inspiration — Extent of Inspir- 
 ation — Inspiration distinct from Revelation, .... 49-61 
 
 \ 7. The Attributes of the Sacred Scriptures, ..... 61 
 
 $8. 1. Authority of the Scriptures, (a) Causative Authority of the Sacred Scriptures. 
 Proofs of Inspiration — Proofs not needed for Believers — Only real Proof, the 
 work of the Holy Spirit — Internal Criteria of Inspiration — External Criteria 
 of Inspiration, (b) Normative or Canonical Authority of the Sacred Scrip- 
 tures. The Scriptures the only Rule of Faith — The Scriptures derive no 
 authority from the Church — The Scriptures the only Judge of Contro- 
 versies — Who are to interpret the Scriptures? — Original languages alone 
 authoritative, .......... 61-74 
 
 \ 9. 2. The Perfection or Sufficiency of the Scriptures. The consequence of Inspir- 
 ation — The abuse and use of Tradition, 74-79 
 
 $10. 3. The Perspicuity of the Scriptures. Meaning of Perspicuity— Extent of Per- 
 spicuity — Perspicuity absolute and ordinate — Piety essential to an inter- 
 preter — The Literal and Spiritual Sense — Obscure Things in Perspicuous 
 Words— Analogy of the Faith— The Mystical Sense, . . . 79-90 
 
 \ 11. 4. The Efficacy of the Scriptures. This topic is discussed under the head of 
 " The Means of Grace," ..." 90 
 
 \ 12. Of the Canon and the Apocrypha. The Old and New Testaments — The Apo- 
 cryphal Books — Marks of Canonicity — External and Internal — Testimony 
 of the Ancient Church — The Antilegomena of the New Testament, 90-102 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 Op the Articles op Faith and op the Symbols op the Church. 
 
 13. What are Articles of Faith? — How related to each other? — Pure and 
 mixed — Fundamental and non-fundamental — Earlier and Later Sym- 
 bols — Relation of the Symbols to the Scriptures — Necessity of the Sym- 
 bols, 102-112 
 
CONTENTS. 17 
 
 PART I. 
 OF GOD. 
 
 I 14. Division of the Subject. ..... ... 113 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 Of God. 
 
 § 15. Preliminary statement — The natural and supernatural Knowledge of God — 
 Innate Natural Knowledge of God — Acquired Natural Knowledge of God — 
 Imperfection of such knowledge — Value of such knowledge — Supernatural 
 Knowledge of God, 113-120 
 
 | 16. 1. The Certainty of the Existence of God. 120 
 
 \ 17. 2. The Nature of God — His name — Cannot be defined — Approximate defi- 
 nitions, ........... 120-125 
 
 | 18. 3. The Attributes of God — Not Accidents — They are one with the Divine 
 Essence — Threefold Method of recognizing them — Classification of Divine 
 Attributes. I. Negative Attributes. Unity — Simplicity — Immutability — In- 
 finity — Immensity — Eternity. II. Positive Attributes. Life — Knowledge — 
 Wisdom — Holiness — Justice — Truth — Power — Goodness. . 126-13'7 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 Of the Holy Trinity. 
 
 §19. The Doctrine is a Mystery — Purely a Matter of Revelation — It is a Funda- 
 mental Doctrine — The Church does not claim to understand it — Why de- 
 scribed in Philosophical Terms — Gradual Development of the Doctrine — 
 Definition of the Trinitarian Terminology. 1 . Numerical Unity of the Di- 
 vine Essence. 2. Diversity and Plurality : not (a) Essential ; nor (b) Acci- 
 dental ; but (c) Hypostatical. Specific Hypostatical Distinctions. — Personal 
 Properties. I. God the Father. II. God the Son — The Eternal Generation. 
 III. God the Holy Ghost — Procession. Scriptural Proof of the Doctrine of 
 the Trinity, 138-167 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 Of Creation. 
 
 | 20. 1. Creation a Divine work. 2. The World created from Nothing. 3. Mat- 
 ter not Eternal. 4. Order and Manner of Creation — Dichotomy or Tri- 
 
18 CONTENTS. 
 
 chotoniy? — Creationism or Traducianisni ? 5. Design of Creation. 6. 
 Excellence of Creation. 7. Time of Creation, . . . . 168-1 78 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 Op Providence. 
 
 §21. The Doctrine taught both by Reason and Revelation — Comprehends Fore- 
 knowledge, Predetermination, and Administration — Basis of the Divine 
 Foreknowledge. I. Preservation, or Continuous Creation — Influence of 
 Second Causes — May Providence be deceived? II. Concurrence, or Divine 
 Co-operation. Does God concur with sin? III. Government, or Divine Con- 
 trol — Does not neutralize Human Freedom — Providence embraces all Things 
 — Providence, general and special, extraordinary and ordinary, . 179-201 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 Of Angels. 
 
 22. When were they created? I. The Nature of Angels. Design of their Cre- 
 ation — Attributes of the Angels. II. The Moral Condition of the Angels. 
 Their Original Condition. A. The Good Angels. Their Powers enlarged — 
 Their Employments. B. The Evil Angels. Consequences of their fall — 
 Demoniacal Possession, ........ 202-224 
 
 PAKT II. 
 
 OF MAN. 
 
 23. General Statement, 225 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 Op the State op Integrity. 
 
 24. State of Integrity Defined. Meaning of the Image of God — Original Right- 
 
 eousness — Other Features of the Image of God, . . . 225-238 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 Op the State op Corruption. 
 
 25. State of Corruption Defined. Of Sin in General — Cause of Sin — Immediate 
 
 Consequence of Sin, 239-242 
 
CONTENTS. 19 
 
 £ 26. Man's First Sin and his consequent Depravity. How did Adam sin? — All men 
 sinned in Adam — Imputation, Arguments of Pelagians answered — What is 
 Natural Depravity ? — Natural Depravity Inherent — Natural Depravity 
 Hereditary — Is Original Sin an accident? — Termination of Original 
 Sin, 242-258 
 
 | 27. Actual Sins. Classified— Sin against the Holy Ghost, . . 258-265 
 
 | 28. The Freedom of the Will. Human Ability— No Free Will in Spiritual 
 Things — Extent of Freedom — Synergism Unscriptural — Civil Righteous- 
 uess— Threefold Condition of the Will 265-276 
 
 PART III. 
 OF THE SOUKCES OF SALVATION. 
 
 § 29. Sources of Salvation 277 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 Of the Benevolence of God towards Fallen Man. 
 
 \ 30. Of the Benevolence of God towards Fallen Man. 1. The Universal Benevo- 
 lence of God. Gratuitous — Impartial — Sincere — Efficacious — Conditioned. 
 2. The Special Benevolence of God. Consequent — Particular — Predesti- 
 nation or Election — Divine Decrees not absolute or arbitrary — Election 
 with respect to faith — Election and Foreknowledge — Divine Decrees not 
 conditioned, but categorical — Election is immutable and irrevocable — 
 Reprobation — Defined and Illustrated, ..... 278-299 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 Of the Fraternal Redemption by Christ. 
 |.31. Statement of the Subject. 300 
 
 A. — Of the Person of Christ, 
 
 \ 32. Of the Personal Union. I. Of the Two Natures in Christ. Truly Divine and 
 truly Human — Attributes of Christ's Humanity. II. Mode of the Personal 
 Union. Negatively stated — Positively stated. . . . 301-316 
 
20 CONTENTS. 
 
 3 33. Of the Communion of Natures, the Personal Designations, and the Com- 
 municatio Idiomatum — Communion of Natures defined — No Intermixture 
 of Natures, but I. Interchange of Designations. II. Communication of 
 Properties. 1. Idiomatic. 2. Majestatic. 3. Apotelesmatic — Meaning 
 Of Perichoresis — Concrete of Nature and Person — Communication — Patris- 
 tic Designations — Lutheran and Reformed views — Diversity among the 
 Lutheran Dogmaticians, . . . . . . . . 316-344 
 
 B.—Of the Office of Christ. 
 
 \ 34. The Threefold Office of Christ— His Mediatorial Work in its threefold 
 aspect, ........... 344-346 
 
 I 35. The Prophetic Office of Christ. Defined— The Immediate and Mediate, 346-348 
 
 $ 36. The Sacerdotal Office of Christ. Defined. I. Satisfaction. Why was Satis- 
 faction needed ? — Antitheses of the Socinians — Satisfaction Infinite — Christ's 
 Active and Passive Obedience — Vicarious Satisfaction — Completeness of the 
 Satisfaction — Its Real Object — Its Personal Object. II. Intercession. Gen- 
 eral and Special Redemption, ....... 348-376 
 
 | 37. The Regal Office of Christ. I. The Kingdom of Power. II. The Kingdom of 
 Grace. III. The Kingdom of Glory— The Delivery of the Kingdom, 376-382 
 
 C. — The States of Christ. 
 
 §38. I. The State of Humiliation. Conception — Nativity — Circumcision — Education 
 — Earthly Intercourse — Passion — Death — Burial — Incarnation not Humili- 
 ation — "The Form of God." II. The State of Exaltation. Descent into 
 Hell — Resurrection — Ascension — Sitting at the Right Hand of God. Di- 
 verse views of the Dogmaticians, ...... 382-413 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 Of the Grace of the Holy Spirit in the Application of Redemption. 
 
 39. Preliminary Remarks, 413-430 
 
 40. The Agent— The Means— The Result, 416 
 
 41. I. Of Faith. Its Constituent Elements — Explicit and Implicit Confidence, the 
 
 Chief Part — Special Faith — Faith of Infants — Living and Dead Faith 
 Contrasted — Nature of Justifying Faith — Efficient Cause of Faith — Instru- 
 mental Cause of Faith — Grades of Faith — Assurance of Faith, . 416-430 
 
 42. 2. Of Justification. The immediate Effect of Faith — Justification a Divine 
 
 Forensic Act, embracing I. The Forgiveness of Sins. II. The Imputation 
 of the Righteousness of Christ. The Ground of Justification — The Means 
 
CONTENTS. 2i 
 
 of Justification — Osiander's Error — Justification a Free Gift of God — Good 
 Works and Justification — The Exclusive Particles — The Effects of Justifi- 
 cation, 430-447 
 
 \ 43. Concomitants and Consequences of Justifying Faith, . . 447 
 
 \ 44. 1. Of the Divine Call. Necessity, Efficacy and Universality of the Call, 448-456 
 
 §45. 2. Of Illumination. Necessity of Illumination by the Holy Spirit — Its 
 Influence upon Intellect and Will — Legal and Evangelical Illumi- 
 nation, ........... 456-462 
 
 | 46. 3. Of Regeneration and Conversion. The Terms defined and contrasted. I. 
 Regeneration. Regeneration a Divine Act — Regeneration of Infants and 
 Adults contrasted — Regeneration always Divinely efficacious — Regenera- 
 tion amissible and recoverable. II. Conversion. Conversion a Divine Act — 
 Elements of Repentance — Private Confession — Conversion ends in Faith — 
 Prevenient and Co-operating Grace — The Divine Word the Instrument — The 
 Human Will in Conversion — Converting Grace may be resisted, . 463-484 
 
 \ 47. 4. Of the Mystical Union. Not Metaphorical but Real — Union, General and 
 Special, 485-491 
 
 § 48. 5. Of Renovation. Renovation contrasted with Regeneration — A gradual 
 work, 491-496 
 
 \ 49. Supplementary. Of Good Works. The Effect of Renovation — Can Unbe- 
 lievers perform Good Works? — Must Believers perform Good Works? — The 
 Works of the Unregenerate — Reward of Good Works, . . 496-503 
 
 PAET IY. 
 OF THE MEA^S OF GEACE AND OF THE CHUKCH. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 Of the Divine Word. 
 | 50. Preliminary Statement, ......... 504 
 
 | 51. Of the Efficacy of the Divine Word. The Supernatural Power of the Word — . 
 Mysticism and Enthusiasm, ....... 504-512 
 
 \ 52. Of the Law and the Gospel. I. The Law. The Ceremonial Law — The Moral 
 Law — Fourfold Use. II. The Gospel. The Gospel in Embryo in the Old 
 Testament — The Gospel and the Law Contrasted — Concurrence of the Law 
 and the Gospel, 512-523 
 
22 CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 Op the Sacraments. 
 
 | 53. Of the Sacraments in general. What constitutes a Sacrament? — Only Two 
 Sacraments — The two Factors — Requisites — The Act of Administration — 
 "Ex Opere Operato" rejected— Relation of Word to Sacrament — Design of 
 the Sacraments — Proper Use of the Sacraments — Old Testament Sacra- 
 ments, 524-540 
 
 \ 54. Of Baptism. The Holy Spirit in Baptism — Sacramental Union — Usages — 
 Design — Affusion — Baptismal Formulae Explained — Exorcism — Baptism by 
 Heretics — Infant Baptism — Infant Faith — Baptismal Grace Continuous — 
 Necessity of Baptism, ........ 540-558 
 
 § 55. Of the Lord's Supptr. I. The Nature of the Lord's Supper. The Words of 
 the Institution to be literally interpreted — The Mode of the Saviour's Pres- 
 ence — Omnipresence of the Human Nature of Christ— Sacramental Mandu- 
 cation — Sacramental Union — Distinction between the Lutheran and Re- 
 formed Doctrine — No Consubstantiation — Distinction between the Lutheran 
 and Romish Doctrine. II. The Form of the Lords Supper. Consecration 
 and Distribution are Essential — Sacramental Union only during distri- 
 bution — The Worthy Reception— Is it a Sacrifice? III. The Design of the 
 Lords Supper. Commemorative — Nutritive — Imparts Saving Grace — Pro- 
 motes Christian Fellowship, ....... 558-584 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 Op the Church. 
 
 § 56. Of the Church in a Wider arid a Narrower Sense. The Assembly of Believers — 
 Church Militant and Triumphant — Church Catholic — Universal and Partic- 
 ular — In what Sense, Visible and Invisible — Church, True and False, 584-601 
 
 #57. Of the Church Collective and Representative. Special and General Councils — 
 Authority of Councils, . . . ' 601-606 
 
 §58. Of the Three Estates in the Church, 606 
 
 \ 59. I. The Ecclesiastical Estate. The Holy Ministry a Divinely appointed Office — 
 The Church gives the Mediate Call — Ordination confirms this Call — The 
 Power of the Keys — Is Ordination Necessary ? — Duty of Obedience — Grades 
 in the Ministry, 607-618 
 
 $ 60. II. The Political Estate. The Civil Authority Divinely appointed — Design of 
 the Civil Authority— Relation of the Civil Authority to the Church, 618-621 
 
 \ 61. III. The Domestic Estate. 1. The Marriage Relation — Divorce. 2. The 
 Parental Relation. 3. The Relation of Master and Servant. . 621-625 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 PART V. 
 
 OF THE LAST THINGS. 
 
 | 62. Preliminary Statement, . . . . . . . . . 626 
 
 | 63. I. Of Death. The Consequence of the Fall — The Dissolution of Soul and 
 Body — Death threefold — The Immortality of the Soul — No Intermediate 
 State of Dormancy, 626-650 
 
 | 64. II. Of the Resurrection of the Dead. Attributes of the Resurrection 
 Body, . . . . 651-654 
 
 § 65. III. Of the Final Judgment. The Signs of its Approach — Antichrist — Con- 
 version of the Jews — Christ the Judge — Form of the Final Judgment, . 657 
 
 \ 66. IV. Of the End of the World, 657 
 
 | 67. V. Of Eternal Damnation and Eternal Life. 1. Eternal Death. 2. Eternal 
 Life, . 657-664 
 
 APPENDIX I. 
 
 Sketch of the Dogmaticians cited, ....... 665-671 
 
 APPENDIX II. 
 
 Explanation of some Scholastico-dogmatic terms, .... 672-674 
 
 APPENDIX III. 
 
 Scripture passages explained. ......... 675 
 
 Index, 677 
 
ABBREVIATION'S. 
 
 Ap. Conf., .... 
 
 Apology of the Augsburg Confession 
 
 Art. Smalcald, 
 
 . Smalcald Articles. 
 
 Bchm., 
 
 Bechmann. 
 
 Br., ..... 
 
 . Baier. 
 
 Brchm., .... 
 
 Brochmann. 
 
 CaL, 
 
 . Calovius. 
 
 Cat. Maj., . . . . 
 
 Luther's Large Catechism. 
 
 Cat. Min., .... 
 
 . Luther's Small Catechism. 
 
 Chmn., .... 
 
 Chemnitz. 
 
 Chran. ex. c. Trid., . 
 
 Chemnitz on the Council of Trent. 
 
 Chmn. d. c. D., . 
 
 Chemnitz on the Lord's Supper. 
 
 Conf. Aug., .... 
 
 . Augsburg Confession. 
 
 Form. Cone, 
 
 The Formula of Concord. 
 
 Grh., 
 
 . Gerhard. 
 
 Hfrffr., . 
 
 Hafenreffer. 
 
 HolL, ..... 
 
 . Hollazius. 
 
 Hutt., 
 
 Hutterus. 
 
 Kg., . . . .- . 
 
 . Koenig. 
 
 Mel., ..... 
 
 Melanchthon. 
 
 Quen., 
 
 . Quenstedt. 
 
 Schrzr., .... 
 
 Scherzer. 
 
 Seln., 
 
 . Selneccer. 
 
 Symb. Nic. . 
 
 Nicene Creed. 
 
INTRODUCTION 
 
 § 1. Of Theology in General, etc. 
 
 * I ^HE Introduction treats : 1. Of Theology in general; 2. Of 
 -*- the Subject of Theology, Religion; 3. Of the Source of TJie- 
 ology, Revelation in general (with an appendix, on the Use of 
 Eeason in Theology) ; 4. Of the Holy Scriptures, in which Rev- 
 elation is contained ; 5. Of the Articles of Faith, which com- 
 prise the contents of the Holy Scriptures ; and of the Symbolical 
 Books, which contain the Confession of the Church. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 Of Theology in General. 
 
 § 2. Meaning of the terms Natural and Revealed. 
 
 T3 Y Theology we understand, according to the etymology of 
 -*-* the term, the knowledge or doctrine of God and of divine 
 things. [1] Such a knowledge we gain, partly in a natural 
 way, by the use of reason alone, partly in a supernatural way, 
 by special revelation ; and hence Theology is divided into Natur- 
 al and Revealed. [2] In both cases, however, Theology is not a 
 mere outward knowledge, by which the understanding alone is 
 enriched, but is of such a nature as to make man truly wise, and 
 show him the way in which he can be saved ; hence Theology, 
 strictly so-called, must be denned: "An eminently practical 
 science, teaching from the revealed Word of God all things ichich 
 sinful man, ivho is to be saved, needs, in order to attain true faith 
 in Christ and holiness of life." [3] (Holl. 1.) If, however, we 
 3 (25) 
 
26 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 leave out of view the influence which Theology exerts upon 
 man, and consider only its subject-matter, Theology may be de- 
 fined as the doctrine concerning God and all religious truths, the 
 province of which is to instruct men concerning the means by 
 which they can be saved. " Theology, viewed as a system and in 
 a secondary sense, is the doctrine concerning God, which teaches 
 man, from the divine Word, as to the true method of worshipping 
 God in Christ, unto eternal life. 11 (Holl. 7.) [4] 
 
 [1] Quen. (I, 1) ; " Theology, if you consider the force and usage 
 of the word, is nothing else than Myog irepl rov 6'eov icalirepl t&v 6eiuv, what 
 is said about God and divine things, as nvevfiaro/ioyia is what is said about 
 spirits, and 'darpohoyia, what is said about the stars." 
 
 The word is sometimes employed in a wider and sometimes in a nar- 
 rower sense. The different significations are thus stated by Holl. (3): 
 " The word Theology is employed in a fourfold sense ; (a) most com- 
 prehensively, for every doctrine concerning God, whether true or mixed 
 with error ; (b) comprehensively, for true Theology, either in itself 
 considered, or as communicated ; either of men on earth or in heaven ; 
 either natural or revealed ; (c) specially, of revealed Theology, that 
 guides mortal man to eternal life ; (d) most specifically, of the doctrine 
 concerning the one and triune God," 
 
 In all these significations, reference is had merely to the Theology of 
 the creature, i. e., of the knowledge which creatures have of God, and 
 not to that which God has of himself. Theologians distinguish also be- 
 tween these, and call the former theologia eicnmog (derived Theology), 
 and the latter theologia apxirvirog (original Theology), by which they de- 
 sign to express that our knowledge of God, although derived and not 
 original, is, nevertheless, absolutely correct, because it is derived from 
 God, and is only the faithful copy of his own knowledge. Holl. (3 
 and 4) : " Archetypal Theology is the knowledge which God has of 
 himself, and which in him is the model of another Theology, which is 
 communicated to intelligent creatures. Ectypal Theology is the science 
 of God and divine things communicated to intelligent creatures by God 
 after the model of his own Theology, as a pattern. We prove our as- 
 sertion ; (1.) Man was made complete, in the image of God. But the 
 image of God consisted in a knowledge of God conformed to the divine 
 wisdom. Therefore its archetype was the the infinite wisdom of God. 
 (2.) Fallen man "is renewed in knowledge after the image of God," 
 Col. 3: 10. Therefore his prototype is the divine self-knowledge. 
 For the knowledge of God and of divine things, which divine revela- 
 
OF THEOLOGY IN GENERAL. 27 
 
 tion communicates to the minds of men, is called by the Apostle knowl- 
 edge after the image of God, for no other reason than because it is ex- 
 pressed in imitation of the knowledge which God has of himself and 
 of all divine things." Considered in its relation to Christ: "Arche- 
 typal Theology belongs to Christ essentially, and through his nature, 
 inasmuch as he is eternal God; it belongs to him, as to his human 
 nature, personally, and through the communicatio idiomatum, by virtue 
 of the personal union." Concerning Ectypal Theology, Quen. further 
 adds (I, 5) : " We have one Ectypal Theology in Christ, viewed as to 
 his human nature, another in angels, and a third in men. (I. 6.) The 
 Ectypal Theology of mere (■tytl&v) men is either that of the Way, i. e. y 
 of this life, viz., of mortals, or that of the Home, i. e., of the other 
 and the happy life, viz., of the finally saved. The Theology of the 
 Way, or of mortals, is twofold, viz., that before and that after the fall. 
 That which describes man before the fall, in the state of integrity, is 
 called also the paradisaical, from the place in which man was placed." 
 But, in reference to all these divisions, Baier remarks (4) : "As the 
 usus loquendi does not allow us to call either God, or Christ, or men in 
 heaven, or angels, theologians, it readily appears that that meaning must 
 here be rejected, which obtains elsewhere, when we add to the defini- 
 tion, 'the theology of the way.'" 
 
 [2] Hole. (6) : "The Theology of the way is twofold, natural and 
 revealed (supernatural). The former is that according to which God 
 is known both by innate ideas, and by the inspection of created things. 
 The latter is the knowledge of God and of divine things, which God 
 communicates to man upon earth, either by immediate revelation or in- 
 spiration (to prophets and apostles), or by mediate revelation or the 
 divine Word, committed to writing." 
 
 [3] Still more frequently Theology is called a practical discipline 
 (habitus practicus). As it appeared to the theological writers that the 
 expression knowledge gave too much prominence to the mere acquaint- 
 ance with the subjects concerned, they therefore sought a definition in 
 which it should be distinctly expressed that by Theology there was 
 meant a divinely wrought knowledge, such as urged its possessor to put 
 to practice what he learned. 
 
 Quen. (I, 11) : "We are here speaking of Theology, not as to what 
 it signifies in a book, but as to what it is, subjectively in the mind." 
 
 Grh. thus defines (II, 13): "Theology, viewed as a discipline and 
 concretely, is a divinely given discipline, bestowed upon man by the 
 Holy Spirit through the Word, whereby he is not only instructed in the 
 knowledge of divine mysteries, by the illumination of the mind, so that 
 
28 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 what he understands produces a salutary effect upon the feelings of his 
 heart and the actions of his life, but so that he is also rendered ready 
 and expert in informing others concerning these divine mysteries and 
 the way of salvation, and in vindicating heavenly truth from the asper- 
 sions of its foes; so that men, resplendent with true faith and good 
 works, are introduced into the kingdom of heaven." 
 
 Quen. (I, 16): "A distinction is made between theoretical sciences, 
 which consist wholly in the mere contemplation of the truth, and prac- 
 tical sciences, which, indeed, require a knowledge of whatever is to be 
 done, but which do not end in this, nor have it as their aim, but which 
 lead to practice and action. We think that Theology is to be num- 
 bered, not with the theoretical, but with the practical sciences." 
 
 Holl. (8) thus states the reasons for this distinction: "(1) Because 
 the immediate aim of Theology is true faith in Christ, the operation 
 (hipyeta) of which is twofold, viz.: internal, which embraces Christ with 
 his benefits, and external, which produces good works, the fruit of 
 righteousness. The ultimate end of Theology is eternal happiness, 
 which consists not only in the intuitive knowledge of God, but also in 
 the enjoyment of God. (2) Because Theology treats of man, not 
 theoretically, as the subject ot its description, as certain qualities are 
 ascribed to man in physiology, but as the subject of its operation, or 
 how he, as a sinner, is to be treed from his misery and transferred into 
 a state of blessedness . . . (3) Because Paul himself defines Theology 
 to be 'the knowledge of the truth which is after godliness.' Tit. 1: 1." 
 [E. V.] 
 
 [4] Quen. (I, 11) : " The term Theology is taken either essentially, 
 absolutely, and as a mental habitude, for the knowledge which the mind 
 holds and to which it clings, or in as far as it is a habit of the human 
 mind;* or accidentally, relatively, systematically, in so far as it is the 
 doctrine or branch of learning which is taught, and learned, or con- 
 tained in books. The former is the primary, the latter the secondary 
 application of the term." 
 
 As to the subject-matter of Theology, systematically considered, out of 
 which it is drawn, Holl. (11) states : " It consists of theological truth, 
 i. e., of facts or conclusions known or deduced from the supernatural 
 revelation of God." In regard to the subject-matter concerning which it 
 treats : " Theology in general, discusses God and divine things, in so far 
 as they have been truly revealed through the divine Word to sinful man, 
 to be believed and practiced. Specifically, it teaches by what ways and 
 
 * See explanation of scholastic terms, Appendix I. 
 
WHO IS A THEOLOGIAN? 29 
 
 means mortal man, corrupted by* sin, is to be introduced into eternal 
 life." 
 
 Theology is divided, according to Kg. (3) into: "Catechetical, or 
 simple, such as is required of all Christians, and acroamatic or more 
 accurate, which is the province of the learned and ministers of the 
 Word. The latter is divided, according to the method of treating it, 
 into exegetical, which is employed in the exhibition of the sacred text; 
 didactic, strictly so-called, which discusses theological subjects in order 
 and systematically; polemic, which treats of theological controversies; 
 homiletic, which teaches the method of preaching to the people ; casuis- 
 tic, which solves doubtful cases of conscience ; Theology of ecclesiastical 
 government, which treats of church discipline, visitations, synods, etc.* 
 etc." 
 
 In correspondence with these two definitions of Theology, we have 
 (Holl. 13 seq.): " The Tlieologian properly and strictly so-called ; a 
 regenerated man, firmly believing in the divine Word, that reveals the 
 mysteries of faith, adhering to it with unshaken confidence, apt in teach- 
 ing others and confuting opponents. A Theologian, in the general sense 
 of the term, is a man well instructed in the department of Theology, 
 whereby he is rendered prompt in expounding and defending heavenly 
 truth. The Theologian in a wider sense is one who rightly discharges 
 the office of a Theologian by expounding, confirming, and defending 
 theological truths, although lie be destitute of sincere holiness of dispo- 
 sition." The " theological knowledge of a truly regenerated and renewed 
 man" is described as "spiritual knowledge, by which the literal sense of 
 the Biblical language is applied according to the use designed by the 
 Holy Spirit, and produces spiritual and godly emotions of the heart;" 
 the "knowledge of an unregenerate Theologian," on the other hand as "a 
 merely literal knowledge, which is applied to the investigation, develop- 
 opment, and apprehension [of the sense of Scripture], and not to the 
 use designed by the Holy Spirit." Concerning this spiritual knowledge, 
 we have the remark : " Far be it from us that we should assert, with 
 the fanatics, that spiritual theological knowledge is derived either from 
 the immediate illumination of the Holy Spirit, or from the internal light 
 or mnemonic power of the soul, through introversion into the hidden 
 recesses of the soul, or that it comprehends only the mystical sense ! We 
 know that the literal sense (logically so-called) of the Biblical language 
 is primarilvand immediately set forth in the words inspired (OeoTveia-oc?) 
 by the Holy Spirit." Literal theological knowledge is, moreover, distin- 
 guished as " external, by which one treats the words of Scripture, in so 
 far as they are analogous to human words, according to the rules of 
 
30 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 grammar and rhetoric, and searches out and extracts some meaning from 
 them ; and as internal, by which one properly estimates the words of 
 Scripture as the truly divine receptacles (6ox&a} or vehicles of the mys- 
 teries of the faith, and adopts, as by common consent, their true literal 
 sense, conformed to the mind of the Holy Spirit." And, with an allu- 
 sion to Quen., he adds : " To understand the internal literal sense, which 
 is spiritual and divine, the illumination of the Holy Spirit is needed ; 
 the illumination may be imperfect, of which the unregenerate are capable, 
 or perfect, such as the regenerate enjoy." This internal, literal knowl- 
 edge is, therefore, not natural or carnal, but supernatural. " It is su- 
 pernatural (a) by virtue of its origin, for it is derived from the light of 
 supernatural revelation ; (b) by virtue of its object, . . . for the myste- 
 ries of the faith are the object of literal knowledge (But what is a mys- 
 tery other than a doctrine transcending the grasp of unaided reason?) 
 
 (c) in view of the impotence of the intellectual subject, 1 Cor. 2 : 14; 
 
 (d) on account of the intimate connection between the Holy Spirit and 
 the Scriptures. For, if the literal internal knowledge of believers be 
 not supernatural, the Holy Spirit is not perpetually and inseparably 
 united with the Holy Scriptures. But the Holy Spirit is perpetually 
 and inseparably united with the Holy Scriptures ; therefore," etc. 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 Of the General Subject of Theology, viz., Religion. 
 
 § 3. Religion, True and False. 
 
 r I ^HE subject of Theology is accordingly, Religion. [1] Religion 
 -*- is the way "and manner in which God is worshipped. That 
 is a false religion in which God is worshipped in a manner that 
 does not accord with his nature and will ; that is the true and right 
 religion in which this is done in the manner which he regards as 
 right and which he prescribes, [2] so that hereby man, estranged 
 from God, is brought back again to him, and secures his salva- 
 tion. This proper manner is taught in the Holy Scriptures ; and 
 thus the true religion, more accurately defined, is that in which 
 God is worshipped in the manner therein prescribed, and there- 
 fore the Christian Religion is the true one. [3] The proper man- 
 
WHAT IS TRUE RELIGION? 31 
 
 ner of worshipping God must, accordingly, first of all, manifest 
 itself in that disposition of soul towards God which is agreeable 
 to him, and secondly, in love toward our neighbor and the prac- 
 tice of all the virtues enjoined by God. [4 J In the widest sense, 
 therefore, Eeligion embraces all that God commands to be be- 
 lieved and to be done. [5] 
 
 [1] Holl. (32) : " Some suppose the term Religion to be derived 
 from religando (Lactantius), others from relegendo (Cicero). Accord- 
 ing to the former derivation, religion signifies the obligation rightly to 
 worship God, or that which imposes upon man obligations and duties. 
 According to the latter etymology, religion is diligent attention to thos<} 
 things which pertain to the worship of God. The former derivation is 
 more generally received." — Quen. " Synonymous are &p%oKiia, James 
 1 : 26 ; evae^eia, 1 Tim. 4 : 8 ; toyiitf Xarpeia, Rom. 12 : 1." 
 
 [2] Quen. (I, 19) : " The Christian religion is the method of wor- 
 shipping God prescribed in the Word, by which man, separated from 
 God by sin, is led back to God, through faith in Jesus Christ (who is 
 both God and man), so that he is reunited with God, and enjoys him 
 eternally." 
 
 Holl. (33) : "Religion, improperly speaking, signifies the false, pro- 
 perly speaking, the true method of worshipping God." 
 
 Holl. (60) : " As opposed to the true Religion, we have not only 
 false religion, but also atheism or irreligion. A false religion is that in 
 which either false gods are worshipped, or the true God is improperly 
 worshipped. Irreligion is that in which impious men regard all religion 
 with contempt, so that, denying the providence and punitive justice of 
 God, they boldly and recklessly do as they please." 
 
 [3] Holl. (34) : " The true Religion is that which is conformed to 
 the Divine Word." 
 
 The characteristics of the true Religion are thus described by Quen. 
 (1,20): 
 
 " (1 ) Divine Sublimity. For its origin is divine, and it has been made 
 known from heaven. It is of divine revelation, not of human inven- 
 tion. 
 
 (2) Unity. As there is one truth, so also there is but one way of 
 coming unto God, John 14:6; Acts 10 : 43 ; 4 : 12 ; Eph. 4 : 5, 6. 
 
 (3) Truth. It is most true, with respect to its form, which consists 
 in agreement and conformity with God's will, revealed in the word of 
 truth ; or because it rests only on the word of God, which is truth, John 
 16 : 11. 
 
32 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 (4) Absolute perfection. For it perfectly and sufficiently contains 
 all things needful to faith and to Christian life. 
 
 (5) Holiness. For it teaches the knowledge of a holy God, the cul- 
 tivation of a holy life, it gives holy precepts, it reveals holy mysteries ; 
 it neither teaches nor commands what is false, absurd, godless, or base. 
 
 (6) Necessity. For if man is to be led to God there must be a way 
 whereby he may be thus led. 
 
 (7) Utility. It leads to God, opens heaven, consoles the conscience, 
 and shows the way to true godliness. 
 
 (8) Antiquity. For it began immediately after the fall of the first 
 man. 
 
 (9) Invincibility. For though attacked, it never succumbs, partly 
 because of its immovable truth, which cannot be conquered, partly be- 
 cause of the constancy and faith of its professors, whom it renders un- 
 moved or invincible. 
 
 (10) Perpetuity. Never as long as the earth exists, and men re- 
 main, will it perish ; for it is upheld from destruction by Divine Provi- 
 dence. 
 
 (11) Spontaneity, i. e., it does not aim at being forced upon men, 
 but seeks to be taught, constraining only a free assent. 
 
 (12) Variety of condition. Subject to various persecutions, it is 
 obscured, but not extinguished; it is oppressed, but not suppressed. 
 
 (13) Unparalleled efficacy in manifesting the glory of God, tran- 
 quillizing the conscience, converting men, promoting godliness, promis- 
 ing a happy death." 
 
 That the Christian religion is the true one is proved by Cal. 1 : 
 152 sqq.: 
 
 " (1) From the requisites of a true religion. A religion which is true 
 and has proceeded from God, must have these elements: (a) Not to 
 teach false, corrupt or absurd things, (b) Not to be new but to have 
 been instituted for communicating salvation, as long as there have been 
 men. (c) Not to have perished or hereafter to perish, (d) Not to 
 leave men in their former errors, much less to sink them the more 
 deeply, but to lead them to holiness. All these pertain to no other than 
 the Christian religion ; since every other religion teaches false, absurd, 
 base things, has originated since men, etc. 
 
 (2) From the truth of Scripture. For since the Christian religion is 
 comprised in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments, its truth 
 will be proved from the truth of these Scriptures, as elsewhere set forth. 
 i (3) From the religion of the Hebrews. For the religion of the Chris- 
 tians and of the ancient patriarchs is one and the same. 
 
CHRISTIANITY, THE TRUE RELIGION. 33 
 
 (4) From the supreme dignity of its rewards. For the excellence of 
 the Christian religion is displayed from the fact that in all ages and 
 nations, none can be produced either more excellent in its rewards, 
 more perfect in its precepts, more sublime in its mysteries or more ad- 
 mirable in the method in which it is to be propagated. For while 
 among the Greeks some entertained the hope of life after the end of the 
 present life, nevertheless they spoke with great hesitancy concerning it 
 (Socrates in Plato's Phsedo, Cicero's Tusculan Disputations, Seneca's 
 Epistles). Philosophers were divided into diverse opinions concerning 
 the end of man, some making virtue the reward, others contending that 
 pleasure is the highest good; the Christian religion, however, offers the 
 true knowledge of this end, promising, after this life, a happy existence 
 not only for the soul, but also for the body; nor are the joys it promises 
 vile, as the banquets for which the Jews hope, or the licentious indul- 
 gence which Mohammedans expect, but true, solid, perennial. Lactan- 
 tius has well said (Institutes, 1. iii., cap. xii.) : 'Virtue is not happy of 
 itself, since all its force is expended in the endurance of evil.' 
 
 (5) From the supreme holiness of its precepts. The sacred rites of the 
 heathen, almost throughout the whole world, were full of cruelty. The 
 mysteries of Ceres and Bacchus abounded in obscenity. How profane 
 and unworthy of God Mohammedanism, the Koran can testify. The 
 Christian religion requires an absolutely holy worship of God, holy 
 trust in Him, and all that is most worthy of God; and of like nature are 
 the duties towards our neighbor which it enjoins. Mohammedanism 
 was born in war, breathes nothing but war, is propagated everywhere 
 by war, while Christianity prohibits every injury, and wishes good 
 to all. Many of the most eminent Greek philosophers praised a com- 
 munity of women, and even did not disapprove of sodomy, which 
 was commended by the example of the gods. But the Christian re- 
 ligion teaches marriage must be held most holy. * * * In short, 
 nothing excellent can be found in any nation which is not taught in the 
 Christian religion with still greater purity, and under sanction of divine 
 authority, as modesty, temperance, prudence, the duties of magistrates 
 and subjects, of parents and children, of husbands and wives, the 
 avoidance of sin, etc.; so that the sum of all its precepts is, to love God 
 above all things, and our neighbor as ourselves. 
 
 (6) From the sublimity of its mysteries. For whatever mystery other 
 religions seem to have, easily brings to those better informed the suspi- 
 cion of vanity. Only the mysteries of the Christian religion are en- 
 tirely placed beyond the reach of man's understanding, and can be con- 
 victed of no falsity or superstition. 
 
34 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 (7) From the propagation of the Christian religion. For there is no 
 religion so widely diffused. If Paganism be mentioned, you mention 
 one name, but not one religion. 
 
 (8) From the mode of its propagation. For the Christian religion 
 made such progress, not by violence or arms, or the example of kings 
 and the powerful. The first teachers of Christianity were of humble 
 rank, and yet, through their agency, within thirty years it not only per- 
 vaded all parts of the Roman Empire, but was extended to the Parth- 
 ians and inhabitants of India, Rom. 15 : 19. Nor only in the begin- 
 ning, but for about three centuries it was advanced without any threats, 
 but even with the power of the empire arrayed against it, so that 
 before Constantine professed Christianity it had conquered almost the 
 greater part of the Roman world. Nor was this done by any elaborate 
 preparation, whether of eloquence or the various arts whereby philoso- 
 phers rendered themselves commendable to the Gentiles. 
 
 (9) From the multitude of its miracles. For as the faith of the Old 
 Testament was attested by most remarkable miracles, both at other 
 times and especially on the departure from Egypt and the entrance into 
 Canaan, whereby its fame was spread abroad among the Gentiles, so far 
 more numerous and more illustrious miracles proclaim the authority of 
 the New Testament. 
 
 (10) From the magnanimity of its martyrs. 
 
 (11) From the testimony of other religions. 'The Jews,' says 
 Augustine (De Civitate Dei, 1. xviii., c. 45), * are dispersed throughout 
 the earth, and by their scriptures give a testimony that we have not in- 
 vented the prophecies concerning Christ. The Mohammedans acknowl- 
 edge Christ as the greatest prophet; and among the heathen many 
 things occur corroborating its testimony in historical matters.' 
 
 (12) From the efficacy and power of Christian doctrine, in arousing, 
 swaying, and soothing souls, attested not only by Scripture but by in- 
 numerable examples of those converted to faith in Christ." 
 
 [4] Quen. (I, 20): "The Christian religion maybe viewed either 
 fiepiKcbq- (in part), or 6Xiku^ ( a s a whole). Taken in the former sense it 
 signifies, first and principally, the immediate worship of God, viz , 
 zvc£(5eia^ or the piety which has regard to the worship of God according 
 to the first table of the law ; secondarily, it signifies those other duties 
 by which God is mediately worshipped, which have respect to the sec- 
 ond table of the law. The love of our neighbor presupposes love to 
 God ; hence, secondarily and by analogy, the duty of love to our neigh- 
 bor comes under the name of religion." 
 
 Br. (16) : "The term Religion signifies, in a stricter sense, either the 
 
35 
 
 habit of the will by which we are inclined to the love, honor and wor- 
 ship due God, on account of his excellence ; or, the acts themselves, of 
 honoring or worshipping God on account of his excellence; and, at the 
 same time, it signifies, on the part of the intellect, the true knowledge 
 of God; on the part of the will, the other virtues (or virtuous acts) 
 which aim at the honor and worship of God. But, in a wider sense, it 
 denotes the whole circle of virtues or acts, that pertain to the worship 
 of God." 
 
 [5] Holl. (43): "Under the name of the Christian Religion is 
 comprehended whatever is to be believed and to be done by sinful man, 
 in order to attain eternal life. As God is religiously worshipped by true 
 faith and the sincere effort to perform good works, so religion, which is 
 the form or method of worshipping God, embraces within its compass 
 things to be believed and things to be done. In a general sense, the 
 things to be believed are all things revealed in the written Word of 
 God ; in a more limited sense, those which are revealed in the Word of 
 God in regard to the salvation of man ; in the most specific sense, 
 they are mysteries, above the comprehension of reason, and to be 
 learned alone from the divine revelation for our salvation." Hence, 
 "the subject-matter of Religion is faith, and love to God and our 
 neighbor." 
 
 We observe further, that Grh. and Br. do not treat of Religion as a 
 separate topic. Br. has, under the head of "The Nature and Constit- 
 uent Elements of Theology," only the following proposition (14): "The 
 means of attaining happiness in natural theology are the acts of the 
 mind and will directed towards God, by which God is rightly known 
 and worshipped. They are known by one name, Religion." This is 
 explained by the definition which the theologians give of Theology, for 
 in accordance with this there is little material left for a special section 
 on the subject of Religion. 
 
36 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 CHAPTEE III. 
 Of the Source of Theology, viz., Eevelation. 
 
 § 4. Revelation, not Reason, not Tradition. 
 
 TN order to understand what is true and correct Theology, we 
 -*- must inquire for the source from which we derive our knowl- 
 edge of it. ("The source (principium) is that from which any- 
 thing, in some manner or other, proceeds." — Quen. 32.) This is 
 the Eevelation given by God.[l] By this divine Eevelation we 
 understand here, not that which is given in nature, but in the 
 Word {supernatural, as distinguished from natural revelation). [2] 
 More accurately, therefore, we say : the source of theological 
 knowledge is the revelation contained in the Holy Scriptures,[3] 
 and this is, moreover, the only source of Theology, [4] and 
 neither reason, [5] nor, at a later date, tradition, or the appeal to 
 the consentaneous doctrine of the ancient church, [6] is to be 
 ranked with it; nor are supplementary revelations now to be 
 expected from any quarter. [7] 
 
 [1] Cal. (I, 269); " Eevelation is taken either in a formal sense, 
 for the act of the divine communication, or objectively for that which is 
 divinely revealed. The former sense is here intended." 
 
 [2] Holl. (61): "We speak) here not of that general revelation or 
 natural manifestation, by which God makes himself known both by the 
 innate light of nature and by the effects conspicuous in the kingdom of 
 nature. But w r e speak of the special and supernatural revelation, which 
 is twofold, immediate and mediate. The Holy Spirit immediately illu- 
 minated the prophets and apostles, and suggested to them conceptions 
 of things and of words concerning doctrines of faith and moral precepts. 
 At the present day God reveals himself to men through means of the Word 
 written by the prophets and apostles." Eevelation is, therefore, defined 
 as: "The external act of God, by which he makes himself known to 
 the human race by his Word, in order that they may have a saving 
 knowledge of him." — Quen. I, 32. 
 
 Cal. (I, 268) thus states the proof that this divine revelation exists. 
 "It having been proved, if this should be denied, that God is, and that 
 
REVELATION, THE SOURCE OF THEOLOGY. 37 
 
 there must be some method in which God may be worshipped by men, 
 we must teach, that it cannot be but that God has revealed that method, 
 so that he may be worshipped properly; then, that God wishes men to 
 be led to the enjoyment of himself, and also, that he has revealed unto 
 men the manner in which they are to be thus led ; finally, the fact that 
 God has revealed himself, must be taught from history, which revela- 
 tion God has seen fit abundantly to accompany with miracles and docu- 
 ments, by which we are rendered absolutely certain that it is truly 
 divine. Rom. 1: 16; 2 Cor. 12: 12. But as one general revelation 
 has been made in nature, Rom. 1: 19 seq., and another special one by 
 verbal communication, it is first to be proved from nature that God is, 
 inasmuch as God has revealed himself unto all by his works, in the for- 
 mation of this world; and subsequently it is to be shown that God has 
 revealed himself to the human race in a more perfect manner by the 
 Word." 
 
 [3] Quen. (I, 32): "The source of Theology is the written, divine 
 revelation contained in the Holy Scriptures." Holl. (61) more accur- 
 ately : "Christian Theology is derived from an infallible source of 
 knowledge, viz., divine revelation, which, for the present state of the 
 Church, is mediate, i. e., comprehended in the writings of the prophets 
 and apostles." As proof, John 20: 31; 2 Tim. 3: 14, 15; Rom. 15: 
 4; 2 Tim. 3: 16, 17. With regard to the different modes of revelation 
 in ancient times, Br. (62): " Formerly God employed many and var- 
 ious methods in revealing those things which pertain to the salvation of 
 man, Heb. 1: 1. Specifically: (1.) By articulate language, uttered in 
 a supernatural way; thus revelations were made to the patriarchs, Gen. 
 18: 2; 19: 1; 22: 1 ; to Moses, Ex. 3 : 2 ; Num, 12: 6; to the 
 Israelites, Ex. 19 : 10. (2.) By dreams or visions, presented to the 
 minds of the sleeping, Gen. 28: 12; Dan. 2: 19. (3) By ecstatic 
 visions of the waking, Ez. 1:4; Dan. 10:5: Acts 10 : 10 ; finally 
 (4.) By the immediate illumination of the intellect, without the inter- 
 vention of dreams and visions, 2 Tim. 3 : 16 ; 2 Pet. 1 : 21. But now, 
 since God has chosen to present, in certain books, those things which 
 are necessary to be known with reference to revealed things, in order to 
 salvation, and not to communicate any new revelations, the only source 
 of Theology is to be found in those ancient revelations which were made 
 immediately to the prophets and apostles and have been committed to 
 writing." 
 
 Inasmuch, however, as the religion of the Old and New Testaments 
 is to be regarded as substantially the same, Quen. (I, 32) adds the re- 
 mark : " As the divine revelation became more full, in the course of 
 
38 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 time, so also did Theology, which was based upon it ; and as the former, 
 just so the latter, gathered up its own additions in the progress of time, 
 God meanwhile imparting new revelations. These additions did not 
 relate to those things which constitute the foundation of faith and salva- 
 tion, but to other things which render the statement and comprehension 
 of these more complete, or which relate to various circumstances, rites, 
 and ceremonies, and to ecclesiastical order and discipline. " 
 
 If, therefore, the Holy Scriptures are thus the source of Theology, 
 we are authorized to draw the following conclusion: "Whatever the 
 Holy Scriptures teach is infallibly true." Hence the early divines 
 speak of a twofold source, viz., the source indefinitely stated, i. e., by a 
 single term ; and the source more fully stated, i. e„ by an entire propo- 
 sition. The former is the Holy Scriptures. The latter, from which the 
 doctrines of the Christian faith are deduced, and into which they are 
 again merged, is this proposition : " Whatever God has revealed in his 
 Word, that is infallibly true, and must be reverently believed and em- 
 braced." From the Holy Scriptures, then, as this source, are drawn 
 all doctrinal truths. " The source, whence theological conclusions are 
 drawn, is but one, viz., the Word of God, or 'Thus saith the Lord.' 
 Theological conclusions are nothing else than truths concerning the 
 faith, elicited and deduced from the Word of God. (JE. g., from the 
 passage 1 John 5 : 7, as a source, is proved the mystery of the most 
 Holy Trinity, and the theological conclusion is drawn : Therefore there 
 is, in the one divine essence, a trinity of persons.)" — Quen., I, 32. 
 
 [4] Quen. (I, 33) : " The sole, proper, adequate, and ordinary 
 source of Theology and of the Christian Religion is the divine revela* 
 tion contained in the Holy Scriptures ; or, what is the same thing, that 
 the canonical Scriptures alone are the absolute source of Theology, so 
 that out of them alone are the articles of faith to be deduced and proved." 
 
 Further (I, 3G) : " Divine revelation is the first and the last source 
 of sacred Theology, beyond which theological discussion among Chris- 
 tians dare not proceed. For every doubt concerning religion in the 
 mind of a true Christian is removed by divine revelation, and by this 
 the faith of the believer grows so strong, and is so firmly established, 
 that it frees his mind from all fear and suspicion of deception, and im- 
 parts to him a firm assurance." 
 
 [5] Quen. (I, 38): "Human or natural reason is not the source of 
 Theology and supernatural things." 
 
 [6] Cal. (I, 304) : " We (contend) that, over and above the written 
 Word of God, there is at present no unwritten Word of God concerning 
 any doctrine necessary to Christian faith and life, not comprehended in 
 
USE OF REASON IN THEOLOGY. 39 
 
 the Scriptures, that ever came forth from the apostles, was handed 
 down by tradition, was preserved by the Church, and is to be received 
 with equal reverence." 
 
 Quex. (I, 44): "The consent of the primitive Church, or of the 
 fathers of the first centuries after Christ, is not a source of Christian 
 faith, either primary or secondary, nor does it produce a divine, but 
 merely a human or probable belief." In reference to this latter clause, 
 Holl. (71) : "(The consent of the fathers) is not to be esteemed of lit- 
 tle, but of great importance, as a ground of credibility, as a secondary 
 source of theological conclusions (viz., because it furnishes opinions or 
 conceptions that are probably true), and as a demonstrative and invalu- 
 able testimony that the early bishops of the Catholic Church understood 
 and expounded passages of the Sacred Scriptures in the same sense in 
 which the Evangelical Church of the present day understands them." 
 
 [7] Holl. (63): "After the completion of the canon of Scripture 
 no new and immediate divine revelation was given to be a fundamental 
 source of doctrine, 1 Cor. 4: 6; Heb. 1: 1." Quen. (I, 48): "The 
 opposite opinion is that of various fanatics who hold that the knowledge 
 of God, and of all doctrines that are to be believed, is not to be sought 
 from the written Word of God, but that a higher wisdom than that con- 
 tained in the Sacred Scriptures is to be sought from a revelation es- 
 pecially made to each individual, and from innate light, from ecstatic 
 raptures [cf. Smalcald Articles] dreams, angelic communications, from 
 an internal word, from the inspiration of the Father, from knowledge 
 internally communicated by Christ, who is essentially united with them, 
 and from the instruction of the Holy Spirit, speaking and teaching in- 
 ternally." 
 
 § 5. Excursus. Concerning the Use of Reason in Theology. 
 
 By the term Eeason, we may understand either the capacity of 
 intellectual apprehension in general, and this is essential to man, 
 for it is only by means of this capacity, which distinguishes him 
 from irrational animals, that he can comprehend the truths of 
 religion. [1] Or, we may understand by Eeason the capacity of 
 acquiring knowledge and appropriating truths. [2] The know- 
 ledge, however, which one thus acquires is, even if true, still de- 
 fective and unsatisfactory, [3] and therefore Eeason is by no 
 means the source from which man can draw the knowledge of 
 saving truths, [4] but for these the revelation contained in Sa- 
 cred Scripture remains ever the only source. 
 
40 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 The question now arises, bow is Keason related to this revela- 
 tion, and what use can Theology make of Eeason? 
 
 Inasmuch as Eeason also derives its knowledge from God, 
 Keason and Eevelation are, of course, not opposed to each 
 other. [5] This holds true, however, only of Eeason considered 
 per se.j of Eeason as it was before the fall of man. This would 
 have remained conscious of the limits of its sphere ; would not 
 have sought to measure divine things by the rule of natural 
 knowledge ; would have subordinated itself to Eevelation, [6] and 
 would have known that there are truths which, although not in 
 antagonism with it, are yet far beyond its reach. [7] 
 
 But the case is very different with Eeason as it dwells now in 
 fallen man; for we must concede that, by man's fall, such a 
 change has occurred that Eeason now often assumes a position of 
 antagonism to revealed truth. [8] It still, indeed, possesses some 
 knowledge of divine things, but this knowledge is obscured in 
 proportion to the moral depravity of man, and it now, more 
 easily than before, transcends the assigned limits. If now 
 Eeason, already before the fall of man, had to keep within mod- 
 est limits, with respect to the truths of Eevelation, much less 
 dare it now, in the fallen condition of man, assume to judge in 
 regard to divine things, or subject the truths of Eevelation to its 
 tests; still less dare it reject that which does not seem to agree 
 with its knowledge: its duty rather is to subject itself to Eevela- 
 tion and learn therefrom. If this be done, however, much will 
 again become intelligible that previously appeared contradic- 
 tory, and it will again approach the condition occupied before 
 the fall. But this will be only an approach to that condition; 
 for just as man. even through regeneration, never again becomes 
 entirely sinless, so the Eeason of the regenerate never attains its 
 original power. [9] We may therefore say of Eeason, even 
 when enlightened, that it can have no decisive judgment in re- 
 gard to matters of faith, and possesses in such matters no norma- 
 tive authority, all the more since this was true of Eeason before 
 the fall. [10] 
 
 As to the use, then, that is to be made of Eeason in Theology, 
 it follows, from what has been said, that Eeason stands in the 
 relation merely of a handmaid to Theology. [11] In so far as it 
 
PHILOSOPHY AND THEOLOGY. 41 
 
 is the capacity for intellectual apprehension in general, the use 
 that is to be made of it will consist in this, that man, by its help, 
 intellectually apprehends the truths of Theology, and accepts 
 from it the means of refuting opponents. In so far, however, as 
 it also conveys knowledge, one may also employ it in the demon- 
 stration of a divine truth; in such a case, Eeason would con- 
 tribute whatever of natural knowledge it has acquired. And 
 just in the same proportion as Eeason has suffered itself to be en- 
 lightened by divine Eevelation, will it be able to demonstrate 
 the harmony of divine truth with natural knowledge. [12] 
 
 [1] Cal. (I, 358): "Human reason denotes either the intellect ot 
 man, that faculty of the rational soul (Holl., 'the intellectual faculty 
 of man') which we doubtless must employ in every kind of knowledge, 
 since man understands alone by the reason or intellect." . . . Holl. 
 (69): "Without the use of reason we cannot understand or prove 
 theological doctrines, or defend them against the arlful objections of 
 opponents. Surely not to brutes, but to men using their sound reason, 
 has God revealed the knowledge of eternal salvation in his word, and 
 upon them he has imposed the earnest injunction to read, hear, and 
 meditate upon his word. The intellect is therefore required, as the re- 
 ceiving subject or apprehending instrument. For, just as we can see 
 nothing without eyes, and hear nothing without ears, so we understand 
 nothing without reason." 
 
 [2] Cal. (ibid.): " Or, reason denotes (philosophy itself, or) the 
 principles known from nature (by the light of nature), and the discus- 
 sion or ratiocination based upon these known principles." These prin- 
 ciples are divided "into organic and philosophical (strictly so called). 
 The former (organic) relate to the mediate disciplines, grammar, rhet- 
 oric, and logic." — (Quen. (I, 39): " These are to be employed in The- 
 ology (as the means of becoming acquainted with Theology), since 
 without them neither the sense nor significance of the words can be de- 
 rived, nor the figures and modes of speech be properly weighed, nor 
 the connection and consequences be perceived, nor discussions be insti- 
 tuted"). The latter (the philosophical) are again divided into ^philo- 
 sophical principles absolutely and unrestrictedly universal (general or 
 transcendental), which consist of a combination of terms essential and 
 simply necessary, so that they cannot be overthrown by any argument, 
 not even by the Scriptures; e. g„ 'It is impossible for anything to be 
 and not to be at the same time;'" and " philosophical principles restrict- 
 edly universal (special or particular,) w r hich are indeed true, to a certain 
 4 
 
42 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 extent, hypothetically, or so far as mere natural knowledge extends, but 
 which, nevertheless, admit of limitation, and which may be invalidated 
 by counter evidence drawn from revelation, if not from nature; e. g., 
 1 As many as are the persons, so many are the essences,' etc." Holl. 
 (68) : " Through these philosophical sources we can also gain a knowl- 
 edge of God, for there is a natural knowledge of God, innate and ac- 
 quired [cognitio Dei naturalis, insita et acquisita] (of which the Theo- 
 logians elsewhere speak more at length), knowledge which is also 
 communicated by divine revelation." Holl. (69): "Thus from the 
 principles of reason philosophers attempt to prove the existence and 
 attributes of God, as subjects belonging to the sciences of Metaphysics 
 and Pneumatology." 
 
 [3] Cal. (II, 47) : " Of the natural knowledge of God there is pred- 
 icated, as to those things that are revealed in nature, imperfection ; and 
 as to the supernatural mysteries of faith, entire worthlessness [nullitas]. 
 
 [4] Holl. (69): " Meanwhile, nevertheless, human reason is not a 
 fountain, or primordial element, from which the peculiar and fundamen- 
 tal principles of faith are derived." 
 
 [5] Flacius, with his assertion, that " the knowledge of God, 
 naturally implanted, is a light full of error, fallacious and deceptive," 
 and subsequently, Daniel Hofmann (" Philosophy is hostile to Theology; 
 what is true in Philosophy is false in Theology"), gave especial occasion 
 to dispute the antagonism between Reason and Revelation. 
 
 Cal. (I, 68) : "That Philosophy is not opposed to Theology, and is 
 by no means to be rejected as brutish, terrene, impure, diabolical, we 
 thus demonstrate : 1. Because the true agrees with the true, and does 
 not antagonize it. But what is known by the light of nature is no less 
 true than what is revealed in Scripture ; 2. Because natural and philo- 
 sophical knowledge has its origin from God ; 3. Because Philosophy 
 leads us to the knowledge of God." 
 
 As this antagonism was still asserted, the Theologians endeavored to 
 prove it to be only apparent. Cal. (I, 74) : " We must distinguish be- 
 tween a real and an apparent contradiction. The maxims of Philoso- 
 phy and the conclusions of Theology do not really contradict each 
 other, but only appear to do so ; for they either do not discuss the same 
 subject, or they do not describe the same condition, mode, or relation of 
 it; as when the philosopher says that the essence is multiplied with the 
 multiplication of persons, he declares this of finite and created persons, 
 not of divine, of which he knows nothing ; concerning the latter, the 
 theologian teaches that this is not true. When the philosopher says, 
 * Of nothing, nothing comes,' i. e., by way of generation, he does not 
 
PHILOSOPHY AND THEOLOGY. 43 
 
 contradict the theologian, who teaches that by the way of creation 
 something does come from nothing. Let Philosophy remain within the 
 limits of its own sphere, then it will not contradict Theology, for this 
 treats of a different subject. But it is not wonderful that those who 
 confound Philosophy with Theology should find contradictions between 
 them, for they pervert both." Qu.en. (I, 43) : " We must distinguish 
 between contrariety and diversity. Philosophy and the principles ot 
 Reason are not indeed contrary to Theology, nor the former to the lat- 
 ter ; but there is a very great difference between those things that are 
 divinely revealed in Scripture and those which are known by the light 
 of nature." — As the Theologians here opposed those who asserted a 
 contradiction between Reason and Revelation, they also controverted 
 those who claimed too much for Reason, as over against Revelation, by 
 maintaining that, because Reason came from God, that which opposes it 
 cannot be true. This charge was brought against the Calvinists, Socin- 
 ians, and Arminians. It was admitted, in opposition to them, that 
 Reason in itself does not contradict Revelation ; an inference, however, 
 which might have become derogatory to divine truth, was obviated by 
 explaining any seeming contradiction on the ground that Reason, in 
 such a case, had overstepped its proper limits. To the proposition : 
 " In nowise can that be true which is repugnant to reason," Grh. (II, 
 371) replies: "Not human Reason, but divine Revelation, is the 
 source of faith, nor are we to judge concerning the articles of faith ac- 
 cording to the dictation of Reason, otherwise we should have no articles 
 of faith, but only decisions of Reason. The cogitations and utterances 
 of Reason are to be restricted and restrained within the sphere of those 
 things which are subject to the decision of reason, and not to be ex- 
 tended to the sphere of those things which are placed entirely beyond 
 the reach of reason ; otherwise, if they should be received as absolutely 
 universal, and are found opposed to the mysteries of the faith, there 
 arise oppositions of science falsely so called, avn&Eceig- ipevdovv/iov yvaceog." 
 To the objection : "Asa smaller light to a greater, so Reason is not 
 contrary to Scripture," Grh. (II, 372) answers: "This contrariety is 
 not necessary, but accidental. Reason restricted to its proper sphere is 
 not contrary to Scripture, but when it wishes to overleap and surpass 
 (lierapaiveiv icai vireppaiveiv) this, and to pass judgment upon the highest 
 mysteries of the faith, by the aid of its own principles, then, by acci- 
 dent (casually), it comes in conflict with Scripture which informs us in 
 regard to the mysteries of faith. Just as the stronger light often re- 
 veals those things which were hidden in the weaker, so the light of grace, 
 enkindled for us in the Word, makes manifest those things which were 
 
44 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 hidden in the light of nature. Just as any one, therefore, who would 
 deny those things which are visible in the greater light because he had 
 not seen them in the smaller, would fail to appreciate the design and 
 benefit of the smaller, so also he who denies or impugns the mysteries 
 of faith revealed in the light of grace, on the ground that they are in- 
 congruous with Reason and the light of nature, fails, at the same time, 
 to make a proper use of the office and benefits of Reason and the light 
 of nature." To the proposition : " What is true theologically cannot 
 be false philosophically, for truth is one," Grh. (ibid.) answers : " In 
 themselves considered, there is no contrariety, no contradiction between 
 Philosophy and Theology, because whatever things concerning the 
 deepest mystery of the faith Theology propounds from Revelation, 
 these a wiser and sincere Philosophy knows are not to be discussed aud 
 estimated according to the principles of Reason, lest there be a 
 /xerd^aatg- elg- aXkoyevo- (a passing over to another sphere), lest there be a 
 confounding of the distinctive principles of distinct departments. So 
 when Theology teaches that Mary brought forth and yet remained a 
 virgin, a truly sensible Philosophy does not say this assertion is contrary 
 to its conclusion, that it is impossible for a virgin to bear a child, be- 
 cause it knows that that conclusion must necessarily be received with 
 this limitation, that for a virgin to bring forth a child naturally and yet 
 remain a virgin, is impossible. Nor does Theology assert the contrary 
 of this, for it says, by supernatural and divine power it came to pass that 
 a virgin brought forth a child. But when some philosophizer wishes 
 his axioms and assertions to be so general that the highest mysteries of 
 the faith are to be adjudged by them, and so invades other spheres, then 
 it comes to pass, by way of accident, that what is true theologically is 
 pronounced false philosophically ; i. e., not according to the proper use 
 of a sound Philosophy, but according to the miserable abuse of it. 
 Thus, justice and the nature of law is everywhere the same, i. e., in its 
 general conception, while, nevertheless, the law of this province is not 
 the same with the law of that, but each government lives under its own 
 special laws. So truth is one in its general conception, while each dis- 
 cipline has its own axioms which are not to be dragged before another 
 tribunal, but to be left in their own sphere." 
 
 [6] Grh. (11,372): " Sound reason is not opposed to the faith, if 
 we accept as such that which is truly and properly so-called, namely 
 that which does not transcend the limits of its sphere, and does not arro- 
 gate to itself decisions in regard to the mysteries of faith ; or which, 
 enlightened by the Word, and sanctified by the Holy Spirit, does not 
 follow its own principles in the investigation of the mysteries of faith, 
 but the light of the Word and the guidance of the Holy Spirit. 
 
REASON BEFORE AND AFTER THE FALL. 45 
 
 [7] Grh. (II, 372): " The articles of faith are not in and of them- 
 selves contrary to Reason, but only above Reason. It may happen, by 
 accident, that they be contrary to Reason, namely, when Reason assumes 
 to decide concerning them upon its own principles, and does not follow 
 the light of the Word, but denies and assails them. Henc£ the articles 
 of faith are not contrary to, but merely above Reason, since Reason be- 
 fore the fall was not yet corrupt and depraved ; but after the fall they 
 are not only above but also contrary to corrupt Reason, for this, in so 
 far as it is thus corrupt, cannot control itself, much less should it wish 
 to judge concerning these by its own principles." 
 
 [8] Grh. (II, 371): " We must distinguish between Reason in man 
 before and since the fall. The former, as such, was never opposed to 
 divine Revelation ; the latter was very frequently thus opposed through 
 the influence of corruption." Grh. (II, 362): " Natural human Reason 
 since the fall (1) is blind, darkened by the mist of error, inwrapped in the 
 shades of ignorance, exposed to vanity and error; Rom. 1 : 21, 1 Cor. 
 3 : 1, Gal. 4 : 8, Eph. 4:17; (2) unskilled in perceiving divine myste- 
 ries and judging concerning them ; Matt. 11: 27, 16:17, 1 Cor. 2 : 14 
 sq. ; (3) opposed to them; Rom. 8 : 6, 1 Cor. 2: 11 sq., 3: 18 sq., 
 hence is to be brought into captivity to the obedience of Christ, 2 Cor. 
 10 : 4, 5 ; (4) and we are commanded to beware of its seduction, Col. 
 2 : 8. Therefore natural human Reason cannot be a rule for judging in 
 matters of faith, and any one pronouncing according to its dictation 
 cannot be a judge in theological controversies." Qden, (I, 43): M We 
 must distinguish between Philosophy (i. e., Reason) considered abstractly 
 and in view of its essence, and Philosophy considered concretely and in 
 view of its existence in a subject corrupted by sin : viewed in the former 
 light it is never opposed to divine truth (for the truth is ever presented 
 as uniform and in harmony with the nature of the objects successively 
 subordinated to it), but viewed in the latter light, in consequence of the 
 ignorance of the intellect and the perversion of the will, it is often pre- 
 posterously applied by the philosopher to the purposes of perversion and 
 hollow r deception. Col. 2 : 8." 
 
 [9] Grh. (II, 371): " We are to make a distinction between the 
 reason of man unregenerate and regenerate. The former counts the mys- 
 teries of faith foolishness, but the latter, in so far as it is such, does not 
 object to them. Then only and only so long is it regenerate as it fol- 
 lows the light of the Word, and judges concerning the mysteries of the 
 faith, not by its own principles, but by the Scriptures. We do uot reject 
 Reason when regenerated, renewed, illuminated by the Word of God, 
 restrained and brought into captivity to the obedience of Christ ; this 
 
46 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 does not draw its opinions, in matters of faith, from its own sources, but 
 from Scripture ; this does not impugn the articles of belief as does 
 Reason when corrupt, left to itself, etc. We must distinguish also be- 
 tween Reason partially rectified in this life, and that which is fully recti- 
 fied in the life to come. The former is not yet so completely renewed, 
 illuminated, and rectified that it should be impossible for it to oppose the 
 articles of faith and impugn them, if it should follow its own guidance. 
 Just as there 'remains in the regenerate a struggle between the flesh and 
 the spirit, by which they are tempted to sin, so there remains in them a 
 struggle between faith and Reason, in so far as it is not yet fully re- 
 newed ; this, however, excludes all opposition between faith and 
 Reason." 
 
 [10] Quen. (I, 43): "Reason is admissible as an instrument, but 
 not as a rule and a judge : the formal principles of Reason no one rejects ; 
 its material principles, which constitute its rule for judging of mysteries, 
 no wise man accepts. No material principle of Reason, as such, but 
 only as it is at the same time a part of Revelation, produces faith theo- 
 logically : that God is, we know from nature • we believe it, however, 
 only through the Scriptures. It does not follow, because some parts of 
 Scripture are axioms known by nature, that therefore Reason is the 
 regulator of theological controversies.' , Id. (I, 43): "Theology does 
 not not condemn the use of Reason, but its abuse and its affectation of 
 directorship or its magisterial use, as normative and decisive in divine 
 things " 
 
 [11] Holl. (71) : " Reason is not a leader, but an humble follower 
 of Theology. Hagar serves as the handmaid of her mistress, she does 
 not command ; when she affects to command she is banished from the 
 sacred home." 
 
 [12] Quen. (I, 42) : "A distinction must be made between the or- 
 ganic or instrumental use of Reason and its principles, when they are 
 employed as instruments for the interpretation and exposition of the 
 Sacred Scriptures, fn refuting the arguments of opponents, drawn from 
 nature and reason, in discussing the signification ard construction of 
 words, and rhetorical figures and modes of speech ; and the normal use 
 of philosophical principles, when they are regarded as principles by 
 which supernatural doctrines are to be tested. The former we admit, 
 the latter we repudiate." The following from Quen. explains and ex- 
 pands this idea ; " It is one thing to employ in Theology the principles 
 and axioms of philosophy for the purpose of illustration, explanation, 
 and as a secondary proof, when a matter is decided by the Scriptures ; 
 and another to employ them for the purpose of deciding and demon- 
 
USE AND ABUSE OF REASON. 47 
 
 strating, or to recognize philosophical principles, or the argumentation 
 based upon them, as authoritative in Theology, or to decide by means 
 of them, the' matters of faith. The former we do, the latter we do not. 
 There must be a distinction made between consequences deduced by the 
 aid of reason from the Sacred Scriptures, and conclusions collected from 
 the sources of nature and reason. The former must not be confounded 
 with the latter. For it is one thing to use legitimate, necessary conse- 
 quences, and another to use the principles of Reason. It is one thing 
 to draw a conclusion and deduce consequences from the declarations of 
 Scripture, according to logical rules, and another to collect consequences 
 from natural principles. A sort of illustration of heavenly matters can 
 be sought for among those things which Reason supplies, but a demon- 
 stration can never be obtained from that source, since it is necessary 
 that this should proceed (non e£ &l,fa>Tpiuv sed H bucEiav) from the same 
 sphere to which the truth which is to be proved belongs, and not to a 
 foreign one." 
 
 This doctrine of the use of reason Grh. develops in a manner some- 
 what different, although substantially the same ; as follows, under the 
 topic, " The Use of Reason in the Rule of Faith." (I, 76, seq.) : (1) 
 The organic use is the following: When our reason brings with it, to 
 the work of drawing out the treasures of divine wisdom hidden in the 
 Scriptures, knowledge of the grammatical force of words, logical obser- 
 vance of order, rhetorical elucidation of figures and acquaintance with 
 the facts of nature, derived from the philosophical branches. This use 
 we greatly commend, yea, we even declare it to be necessary. (2) As 
 to the edificative (KaTaoKEvcurriKdg^ use of reason, it is to be thus regarded. 
 There is a certain natural knowledge of God, Rom. 1 : 19, 20, but this 
 should be subordinate to that which is divinely revealed in the AYord ; 
 so that, where there is a disagreement, the former should yield to the 
 latter ; and where they agree, the former confirms and strengthens the 
 latter. In short, as a servant it should, with all due reverence, minister 
 to the latter. (3) The destructive (avaaKevaariKdg se&efeyKTuUig) use, when 
 legitimate, is the following : Errors in doctrine are first to be confuted 
 by arguments drawn from the Sacred Scriptures, as the only and 
 proper source of Theology, but afterwards philosophical reasons maybe 
 added, so that it may be shown that the false dogma is repugnant, not 
 only to the light of grace, but also to the light of nature. But when 
 the truth of any doctrine has been clearly proved by unanswerable 
 scriptural arguments, we should never allow our confidence in it to be 
 shaken by any philosophical reasons, however specious they may be." 
 
 Id. (II, 9) : "Although some things are taught in Theology, which 
 
48 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 can be learned in some measure by the light of nature and Reason, yet 
 human Reason cannot undertake to become thoroughly acquainted with 
 the mysteries of faith, properly so called, by means of its own powers ; 
 and as to such things as, already known from nature, are taught in 
 Theology, it need not seek for proof elsewhere than in their own proper 
 source, the Word of God, which is abundantly able to prove them. 
 ... In this latter manner the Theologian becomes indebted, for 
 some things, to the philosopher ; not, indeed, as though he were not 
 able to know them without the aid of philosophical principles, from 
 Scripture, as the proper and native (olnetu) source of his own science,- 
 but because, in the coarse of the investigation, he perceives the truth 
 of the proposition according to the principles of philosophy. " 
 
 That to which Grh. here merely alludes, the later Theologians, such 
 as Quen., Br., and Holl. develop at greater length when treating of 
 the pure and mixed articles; by the former of which are understood 
 those which contain truths that can be known only by Revelation, by 
 the latter such as contain truths which may, at least in part, be other- 
 wise known. Holl. (68): "Mixed articles of faith may, in some 
 measure, be known by the principles of Philosophy. But the pure arti- 
 cles of faith can be learned and proved only from Sacred Scripture as 
 the appropriate, fundamental, and original source. " But the remark of 
 Quen. is well worthy of attention, that (I, 39) "in the mixed articles 
 w r e grant that special (philosophical) principles may be employed; not, 
 indeed, for the purpose of decision or demonstration, but merely for 
 illustration, or as a sort of secondary proof of that which has already 
 been decided by the Scriptures." And here belongs also the statement 
 of Quen., concerning the formal and material principles of Reason, al- 
 ready quoted in the tenth note. This statement of Quen. conveys the 
 same idea as the last, quoted from Grh., and is designed to prevent 
 the assignment of the right of decision in the mixed articles to Reason, 
 although it is to have something to do with them. Those Theologians 
 who adhere to the distinctive arrangement, described in note second, of 
 organic and philosophical principles, admit also the use of the absolutely 
 universal principles in Theology. It may be questioned, however, 
 whether these are so accurately distinguished from the restrictedly uni- 
 versal principles which are not admissible, that mistakes may not easily 
 arise. In regard to this Br. (157) thus expresses himself: "The ma- 
 terial principles of Reason are also with propriety employed ; however, 
 when they are particular or specific, they are subordinated to the uni- 
 versal principle (the grand source) of Theology ; but the universal prin- 
 ciples of Reason may be employed only when they are absolutely 
 
THE SACRED SCRIPTURES ARE THE WORD OF GOD. 49 
 
 necessary, namely, when the demonstration of the opposite would imply 
 a contradiction. For otherwise, if the principles of Reason were em- 
 ployed, not absolutely, but relatively, or, so to speak, universally and 
 necessarily, it might easily happen that a conclusion would be reached 
 repugnant to the mysteries or to the articles of faith, even to those of 
 fundamental importance." • 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 Of the Sacred Scriptures. 
 
 T~]Sr treating of the Sacred Scriptures as the recorded revelation 
 -*- of God, we speak 1, of what is understood by the Sacred 
 Scriptures and Inspiration; 2, of the Attributes of the Sacred 
 Scriptures; 3, of the Canon. 
 
 § 6. Of the terms Sacred Scriptures and Inspiration. 
 
 God determined that his revelation should be committed to 
 writing, so that it might be preserved pure and uncorrupted 
 throughout all future time;[l] therefore he has deposited it in 
 the Sacred Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments. [2] 
 These are, therefore, defined to be the written Word of God. [3] 
 Grh.: "The Holy Scripture is the Word of God recorded in the 
 Holy Scriptures." Between these and the Word of God there 
 is, then, no real distinction, inasmuch as they contain nothing 
 more than this very Word of God, which was also orally pro- 
 claimed;^] and they contain it entire and complete, so that 
 aside from them, no Word of God is anywhere to be found.[5] 
 By being the Word of God the Sacred Scriptures are distin- 
 guished from all other books, for, in consequence of this, they are, 
 in respect of all their contents, entirely divine; and this by virtue 
 of the fact that they were communicated by inspiration from 
 God, to the prophets and apostles. [6] God is therefore their 
 author (causa principalis), and the prophets and apostles only the 
 instruments (causa instrumentalis) which God employed in their 
 production. [7] We are, therefore, to ascribe the origin of the 
 
50 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Sacred Scriptures to a peculiar agency of God, by means of 
 which he impelled the prophets and apostles to the production of 
 the Sacred Scriptures, [8] and communicated to them both the 
 matter and the form of that which was to be written. [9] This 
 agency of God, by means of which the Sacred Scriptures were 
 producecf, we call Inspiration. [10] Br.: "Divine inspiration 
 was that agency by which God supernaturally communicated to 
 the intellect of those who wrote not only the correct conception 
 of all that was to be written, but also the conception of the words 
 themselves and of everything by which they were to be ex- 
 pressed, and by which he also instigated their will to the act of 
 writing." Hence it follows, that everything that is contained in 
 the Sacred Scriptures, is altogether, and in every particular, true 
 and free from all error. [11] 
 
 [1] Chmn. (Exam. Cone. Trid. I, 20) : " We show .... why and 
 wherefore the Sacred Scriptures were written ; because, viz., by tradi- 
 tion purity of doctrine was not preserved ; but, under shelter of that 
 term, many strange and false things were mingled up with the true." 
 
 Grh. (II, 26) : "'Why did God desire his Word, at first orally pro- 
 mulgated, to be committed to writing?' The principal causes appear 
 to have been the following: 1. The shortness of human life. 2. The 
 great number of men. 3. The unfaithfulness to be expected from the 
 guardianship of tradition. 4. The weakness of human memory. 5. 
 The permanence of heavenly truth. 6. The wickedness of man. 7. 
 (In the New Testament), The perverseness of heretics, which was to 
 be held in check." 
 
 [2] Grh. (II, 13): "The Scriptures have their designation from 
 the formal, external act, viz., that of writing, by which the Word of 
 God, at first orally promulgated, was, by the command of God, recorded. 
 God himself made the grand and majestic beginning of this work when 
 he inscribed his law on Mount Sinai, upon tablets of stone, which, on 
 this account, are called 'the writing of God.' Ex. 32: 16. To distin- 
 guish them from all other writings, they are called the Sacred Scriptures, 
 an appellation derived from Rom. 1 : 2 and 2 Tim. 3 : 15. The reasons 
 of this designation are drawn, 1. From their original efficient cause, 
 their great author, who is God most holy, yea holiness itself, Is. 6: 3 ; 
 Dan. 9: 24. 2. From their instrumental cause, viz., holy men, 2* Pet. 
 1 : 21. 3. From their matter, for they contain holy and divine mys- 
 teries, precepts for holy living, Ps. 105 : 42. 4. From their design and 
 
THE SACRED SCRIPTURES ARE THE WORD OF GOD. 51 
 
 effects, for the Holy Spirit sanctifies men through the reading and study 
 of the Scriptures, John 17 : 17. 5. From the additional circumstance 
 that they are widely different from all other writings, both ecclesiastical 
 and profane, inasmuch as they are clothed with the sublime attribute of 
 canonical authority, to which every believing and godly mind pays due 
 deference." 
 
 Terms synonymous with Sacred Scripture, are (Id. II, 16) : ypa<j>% or 
 ypa<pdc, John 7 : 38 and 42 ; Acts 8 : 12 ; Rom. 4:3; ypafyai ayiai, Rom. 
 1:2; ypdufiara, 2 Tim. 3 : 15 : ypa<pfi&e6-vevoTOQ, v. 16. Titles of honor 
 which are attributed to the Word of God in Scripture, are the follow- 
 ing : nifT "Dl hoyia rov deov. Rom. 3 : 2 ; fay 6 Xoyog tov 6eov, Heb. 4 : 
 t : - : 
 
 12 ; pTJiiara Tfjg fa^g- aiuvlov, John 6 : 68. The whole collection is termed 
 rn'lfin "ISO Josh. 1: 8; HIT HiDD Is. 34: 16; *OpD Neh. 8: 8. 
 
 t - v v t : v v t| : ■ 
 
 [3] Grh. (II, 427): ''The Holy Scriptures are the Word of God 
 reduced to writing, according to his will, by the prophets, evangelists, 
 and apostles, perfectly and perspicuously setting forth the doctrine of 
 the nature and will of God, that men may thereby be brought unto eter- 
 nal life." 
 
 Holl. (77) : " In the definition of the Holy Scriptures, the Word of 
 God signifies formally the purpose of God, or the conception of the 
 divine mind, revealed for the salvation of men immediately to the 
 prophets and apostles, and mediately, through their ministrations, to the 
 whole race of man." 
 
 For the sake of the greatest possible accuracy, the following distinc- 
 tions are made. Grh. (II, 14) : " By the term Scripture, we are not 
 to understand so much the external form, or sign, i. e., the particular 
 letters employed, the art of writing and the expressions by which the 
 divine revelation is described, as the matter itself or the thing signified, 
 just that which is marked and represented by the writing, viz., the 
 Word of God itself, which instructs us concerning the nature and will 
 of God. For, as in all writing, performed by an intelligent agent, 
 so also in these prophetic and apostolic writings, two things are to be 
 considered, viz., in the first place, the letters, syllables, and sentences 
 which are written, and which are external symbols signifying and ex- 
 pressing conceptions of the mind; and, secondly, those conceptions 
 themselves, which are the thing signified, expressed by these external 
 symbols of letters, syllables, and sentences ; wherefore in the term Scrip- 
 tures we embrace both of these, and the latter especially." According as 
 the term is taken in one or the other of these significations, the rela- 
 tion of the Church to the Scriptures is differently expressed. Grh. 
 (II, 15): "Whence we add, by way of corollary, that certain things 
 
52 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 are predicated of Scripture, with reference to its matter, as that it is more 
 ancient than the Church, that it is the very Word of God itself, form- 
 erly preached orally by the apostles and prophets ; and others in refer- 
 ence to its form, as that it is, in point of time, later than the Church, 
 that at the last day it will perish ; while, on the other hand, as to its 
 matter, it can never be destroyed or perish, John 10 : 35." 
 
 [4] Grh. (II, 15) : " That there is no real difference between the 
 Word of God and the Sacred Scriptures, viewed in reference to the 
 matter contained in them, is proved, 1. By the subject-matter of Scrip- 
 ture. The prophets and apostles wrote that, and nothing else than 
 that, which, taught by divine inspiration, they had before preached 
 orally, 1 Cor. 15 : 1 ; 2 Cor. 1:13; Phil. 3 : 1 ; 2 Thess. 2 : 15 ; 1 
 John 1:3. 2. By the identity of the spoken and written Word. Be- 
 cause the recorded predictions of the Old Testament are frequently 
 quoted in the New, with these words : ' That it might be fulfilled which 
 was spoken by the prophets,' Matt. 1 : 22, 2 : 15, 4 : 14, etc. There- 
 fore, what the prophets said or predicted, is the same as that which they 
 wrote. 3. By the rule of logic : ' The accident does not alter the 
 essence.' It is a mere circumstance in regard to the Word of God, 
 whether it be proclaimed orally or committed to writing. It is one and 
 the same Word of God, whether it be presented to us in the form of 
 spoken or written language ; since neither the original efficient cause, 
 nor the matter, nor the internal form, nor the object, is thereby 
 changed, but only the mode of presentation by the use of different 
 organs. 4. By the demonstrative particle employed by the apostles. 
 Paul speaks thus distinctively of the Mosaic writings and the other like 
 books of the Old and New Testament: * tovt' ean to pfjfLa i^r Triare^y' 
 1 this is the word of faith,' Rom. 10:8; Peter, in 1 Pet. 1 : 25." 
 
 Cal. (I, 528) : 1. " The fanatical sects, especially, deny that the 
 Scriptures are, strictly speaking, the Word of God, maintaining that 
 the internal Word of God alone can properly be called the Word of 
 God." (Schwenckfeld, Rathmann, Weigel.) 
 
 [5] Grh. (II, 16) : 1. " This distinction (viz., that of the Papists 
 between the written and unwritten Word) may, in a certain sense, be 
 admitted, viz., if by the term 'unwritten Word' is understood the 
 divine revelation proclaimed orally by the patriarchs before the Mosaic 
 books were written, but after the publication of the Scripture Canon, there 
 can be no unwritten Word of God, as distinct from Scripture." 
 
 2. u We must distinguish between the leading truths of divine 
 revelation which are necessary, essential, etc., and their more full ex- 
 planation. The prophets and apostles committed to writing the prin- 
 
INSPIRATION. 53 
 
 cipal doctrines of revelation, which are necessary to be known by all, 
 and which we do not deny that they explained orally at greater length. " 
 
 [6] Quen. (I, 56): " The internal form, or that which gives exist- 
 ence to the Scriptures, so that they are indeed the Word of God, that, 
 namely, which constitutes them and distinguishes them from all other 
 writings, is the inspired (Qe6irvevaro^ sense of Scripture, which, in gen- 
 eral, is the conception of the divine intellect concerning divine mys- 
 teries and our salvation, formed from eternity, and revealed in time 
 and communicated in writing to us ; or it is divine inspiration itself 
 (QsonvevcTia^^ 2 Tim. 3 : 16, by which, namely, it is constituted a divine, 
 and is distinguished from a human word." 
 
 [7] Quen. (I, 55) : " The efficient or principal cause of Scripture is 
 the triune God, 2 Tim. 3 : 16 (the Father, Heb. 1:1; the Son, John 
 1 : 18, and the Holy Spirit, 2 Sam. 23 : 2 ; 1 Pet. 1 : 11 ; 2 Pet. 
 1 : 21) ; 1. By an original decree. 2. By subsequent inspiration, or 
 by ordeiing that holy men of God should write, and by inspiring what 
 was to be written." 
 
 Grh. (II, 26) : " The instrumental causes of Sacred Scripture -were 
 holy men of God, 2 Pet. 1 : 21, i. e., men peculiarly and immediately 
 elected and called by God for the purpose of committing to writing the 
 divine revelations ; such were the prophets of the Old Testament and 
 the evangelists and apostles of the New Testament; whom, therefore, 
 we properly call the amanuenses of God, the hand of Christ, and the 
 scribes or notaries of the Holy Spirit, since they neither spoke nor 
 wrote by their own human will, but, borne along by the Holy Spirit 
 (<t>ep6fievoc vird rov Trvevfiarog- dyiov^ were acted upon, led, driven, inspired, 
 and governed by the Holy Spirit. They wrote not as men, but as men 
 of God, i. e., as servants of God and peculiar organs of the Holy Spirit. 
 When, therefore, a canonical book is called a book of Moses, the psalms 
 of David, an epistle of Paul, etc., this is merely a reference to the 
 agent, not to the principal cause." 
 
 Quen. (I, 55): " God, therefore, alone, if we wish to speak accu- 
 rately, is to be called the author of the Sacred Scriptures ; the prophets 
 and apostles cannot be called the authors, except by a kind of cata- 
 chresis." To the remark that prophets and apostles may be called the 
 amanuenses of God, Quenstedt adds : " And not as though these divine 
 amanuenses wrote ignorantly and unwillingly, beyond the reach of and 
 contrary to their own will ; for they wrote cheerfully, willingly and in- 
 telligently. They are said to be yepofiepoi, driven, moved, urged on by 
 the Holy Spirit, not as though they were in a state of unconsciousness, 
 as the Enthusiasts pretended to be, and as the heathen feigned that there 
 
54 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 was a certain hd-ovaiaafibg- in their soothsayers ; nor, further, by any 
 means, as though the prophets themselves did not understand their own 
 prophecies or the things which they wrote, which was formerly .... 
 the error of the Montanists ; but, because they wrote nothing of their 
 own accord, but everything at the dictation of the Holy Spirit." Inas- 
 much as it holds good of all the sacred writers, that they are inspired, 
 those are also accounted such who were not, in the strictest sense, apos- 
 tles. Holl. (80) : " By the name apostles we here designate those 
 holy men of God, who, after the birth of Christ, wrote the Scriptures 
 of the New Testament ; although they did not all belong to the college of 
 the apostles, chosen by Christ, before his ascension, to teach all nations ; 
 but who, after Christ's ascension, were numbered with the apostles ; 
 such were Matthias (whose writings, however, we do not possess) and 
 Paul. But also those apostolic men, nearest to the apostles in office 
 and dignity, are called apostles in a wider sense ; such are Mark and 
 Luke, the evangelists, cf. Rom. 16 : 7." 
 
 [8] Holl. (83): " Oeonvevoria (inspiration) denotes as well the ante- 
 cedent divine instigation or peculiar impulse of the will to engage in writ- 
 ing, as the immediate illumination by which the mind of the sacred 
 writer is fully enlightened through the supernatural illumination of di- 
 vine grace, and the conceptions of the things to be written are themselves 
 suggested immediately by the Holy Spirit" The co-operation which here 
 takes place on the part of God is described by Quen. (I, 65) as " a 
 most special and extraordinary concurrence, peculiar to the sacred writ- 
 ters," and to be carefully distinguished from " the general and common 
 concurrence of God, by virtue of which God is present to all believers 
 sincerely meditating upon, and writing about, sacred things." Holl. 
 (83) distinguishes between inspiration and the divine governance. 
 " For the latter merely guards against anything being written that is 
 not true, becoming, congruous ; whereas the former, through the Holy 
 Spirit dictating, suggests the conception of the things to be written. 
 The divine governance would warrant the infallibility of the Sacred 
 Scriptures, but not their inspiration." If the impulse to engage in writ- 
 ing be embraced under the term inspiration, then it follows that all the 
 Sacred Scriptures were written by the command of God, because all are 
 inspired. Quen. (I, 65): "All the canonical books, both of the Old 
 and New Testaments, were written by God, who peculiarly incited and 
 impelled the sacred writers to engage in the work, and, therefore, the 
 Scriptures of the New Testament were recorded according to the com- 
 mand and will of God by the evangelists and apostles." 
 
 The opposite view is that held by the papists, who foolishly assert 
 
INSPIRATION. 55 
 
 that the evangelists and apostles did not write by any divine command, 
 but were incidentally urged by some accidental circumstance originating 
 elsewhere, or by necessity. It is, indeed, granted that we do not pos- 
 sess the proof of an express and outward command of God in the case 
 of each of the sacred writings, but it is at the same time observed that 
 the want of this is not felt where the impulse exists. Grh. (II, 30) : 
 "In the holy men of God, the external command and the internal im- 
 pulse correspond to each other. For what else is that divine impulse 
 than an internal and secret command of precisely the same authority 
 and weight with one that is external and manifest?" The latter is 
 proved (by Holl. (81), but also in the same manner by all the earlier 
 writers) to have existed.in the case of all the books of Scripture : " 1. 
 By the general command of Christ, Matt. 28 : 19. (Grh. (II, 31): 
 Those who were commanded to teach all nations, were also commanded 
 to reduce their teachings to writing; for they could not teach all na- 
 tions, even of the succeeding age, orally and without writing.) 2. By 
 the impulse of the Holy Spirit, which Peter teaches, 2 Pet. 1:21. 3. By 
 the divine inspiration of the Sacred Scriptures, which Paul inculcates, 
 2 Tim. 3:16. 4. By the apostolic office, in which these holy men be- 
 came the ambassadors of God, 2 Cor. 5 : 20. Ambassadors are restricted 
 by the commands of their sovereign. Peter, as an ambassador of God, 
 did not undertake to preach to the Gentiles without a divine command ; 
 therefore still less would he dare to write an epistle unless commanded 
 by God." That, however, the external instigations alluded to in the 
 antithesis of the Papists are not excluded, Grh. (II, 33) had already 
 stated: u The inducements to engage in writing brought to bear upon 
 the apostles from without, do not annul the internal command, but 
 rather confirm it, since those circumstances were made to influence the 
 apostles by the wonderful arrangement of divine Providence, and to them 
 was subsequently added the interior impulse of the Holy Spirit, urged 
 on by which they applied their hand to the work." 
 
 [9] Hereby a real and a verbal inspiration are asserted, from which 
 it follows that there is absolutely nothing in the Holy Scriptures that is 
 not inspired. These assertions are contained in the following two sen- 
 tences (of Holl., 83 and 85) : 
 
 " I. The conceptions of all that is contained in the Sacred Scriptures 
 were immediately communicated by the Holy Spirit to the prophets and 
 apostles. 
 
 " II. All the words, without exception, contained in the Sacred 
 Manuscript, were dictated by the Holy Spirit to the pen of the prophets 
 and apostles." 
 
56 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 These two sentences we illustrate by the following remarks of Quen. 
 and Holl. In reference to No. I: 1. "In inspiration we recognize a 
 divine assistance and direction, which includes the inspiration and dic- 
 tation of the Holy Spirit; but we deny as insufficient such a bare divine 
 assistance and direction as would simply prevent the sacred writers from 
 departing from the truth in speaking and writing . . . The Holy Spirit 
 guides others also in writing, i. e., so that we observe here a differ- 
 ence in this respect, that the Holy Spirit so directed the inspired 
 (SeoTTvevarov^ men, that he at the same time suggested and communi- 
 cated all things to them in so far as they are recorded in Scripture." — 
 Quen., I, 68. 
 
 2. Inspiration embraces all that is contained^in Scripture, and there- 
 fore also those things which could have been otherwise known to the 
 apostles and prophets, because in this case it was necessary that these 
 things should be said just at the particular time when the design which 
 God had in view required it. Holl. (84) : " The things which were 
 known to the sacred writers may be considered either absolutely and 
 in themselves, or relatively, in reference to the purpose of God to have 
 them written. For, although the sacred amanuenses may have known 
 certain things, which are described by them before the act of writing, 
 yet it was not, in the nature of the case, known to them whether God 
 desired these things to be described, or under what circumstances, in what 
 order, and with what words they should be committed to writing." 
 
 3. In like manner inspiration embraces things that are not of a spir- 
 itual nature. Holl. (83) : " There are contained in Scripture histor- 
 ical, chronological, genealogical, astronomical, natural-historical, and 
 political matters, which, although the knowledge of them is not actually 
 necessary to salvation, are nevertheless divinely revealed, because an 
 acquaintance with them assists not a little in the interpretation of the 
 Sacred Scriptures, and in illustrating the doctrines and moral precepts. 
 If only the mysteries of the faith, which are contained in the Sacred 
 Scriptures, depend upon divine inspiration, and all the rest, which may 
 be known by the light of nature, depend merely upon the divine direc- 
 tion, then the whole of Scripture is not inspired. But Paul declares 
 that the whole of Scripture is divinely inspired. Therefore not only 
 the mysteries of the faith, but also the remaining truths that may be 
 known by the light of nature, which are contained in Scripture, are 
 divinely suggested and inspired." 
 
 Therefore, 4. E^en apparently unimportant matters are, by all 
 means, to be regarded as also inspired. Quen. (I, 71); "A matter 
 may be of small moment, considered in itself and with reference to the 
 
INSPIRATION. 57 
 
 estimation in which it is held by men, and yet of great importance if we 
 regard the end and wise design which God has in view with regard to 
 it. Many things in Scripture seem to be of small account (2 Tim. 4 : 
 13), in regard to which some suppose that our theory of inspiration 
 derogates from the dignity of the Holy Spirit, but they are, neverthe- 
 less, of great moment, if we regard the end had in view (Rom. 15 : 4) 
 and the all-wise design of God, in accordance with which these things 
 were introduced into the Scriptures." Calixtus (in Quen., I, G9) is 
 a prominent advocate of the opposite view, viz.: '" Neither is it taught 
 in Scripture, that it is necessary to ascribe all the particulars that are 
 contained in it to a peculiar divine revelation, but that the principal 
 topics, those which the Scripture is mainly and peculiarly designed to 
 teach, viz., those which relate to the redemption and salvation of the 
 human race, are to be ascribed solely to that particular divine revela- 
 tion ; but, that in writing concerning other things, known in some other 
 way, either by experience or the light of nature, the writers were so 
 directed by the divine assistance and by the Holy Spirit, that they wrote 
 nothing but what was actual, true, becoming, and congruous." The 
 proof of plenary inspiration is drawn 1. From 2 Tim. 3: 16. (Quen. 
 (I, 71) : " The word vaca may be taken distributively, of the single 
 books or parts of Scripture, or collectively for those parts taken as a 
 whole, so that naaa is the same as bfaj ; in either case our opinion re- 
 mains true, viz., that all Scripture is inspired.") Whence the following 
 argument : Cal. (I, 555) : " If all Scripture be inspired (Oebizvevarog^^ 
 then there can be nothing in the Holy Scriptures that was not divinely 
 suggested and by inspiration communicated to those who wrote. For, 
 if even a single particle of Scripture were derived from human knowl- 
 edge and memory, or from human revelation, then it could not be 
 asserted that all Scripture is divinely inspired." 2. From 2 Pet. 1 : 21 
 (although Peter does not allude particularly to writing, but speaking, 
 • . • yet by "kakiav both speaking and writing are here implied, and 
 both are comprehended under this term; cf. Acts 2: 31; 3 : 24; Rom. 
 3: 19; for just as the holy men of God were incited and impelled by 
 the Holy Spirit to speak, so were they also incited and impelled by him 
 to write). 3. By the promise of Christ, John 14; 26. 4. From 1 
 Cor. 2: 10. We add, from Cal. (I, 556), the following additional 
 proofs: "From the originating cause of Scripture, if indeed the sacred 
 writers were merely the pen, the hand, or the amanuenses of the Holy 
 Spirit; from the nature of the direction of the Holy Spirit, which is 
 usually described as such that the Scriptures were written by his direc- 
 tion, wherefore Gregory the Great declared that the whole of the Sacred 
 5 
 
58 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Scriptures were nothing more nor less than a letter from God the 
 Creator to man his creature ; from the equal authority of all that is 
 contained in Scripture. For not merely those things which directly re- 
 fer to the subjects of faith and salvation are the Word of God, but 
 everything that is found in Scripture, Rom. 3 : 2, and, for the same 
 reason that they are called by this name, they well deserve to be re- 
 garded as the immediate Word of God." 
 
 In relation to No. II., Holl. (87) : "The divine inspiration of the 
 words known by common usage, was necessary to the proper expression 
 of the mind of the Holy Spirit. For the prophets and apostles were 
 not at liberty to clothe the divine meaning in such words as they might 
 of their own accord select ; but it was their duty to adhere to, and de- 
 pend upon, the oral dictation of the Holy Spirit, so that they might 
 commit the Sacred Scriptures to writing, in the order and connection 
 so graciously and excellently given, and in which they would appear in 
 perfect accordance with the mind of the Holy Spirit." Quen. (I, 76) 
 thus accounts for the variety of style: "There is a great diversity 
 among the sacred writers in regard to style and mode of speaking, which 
 appears to arise from the fact that the Holy Spirit accommodated him- 
 self to the ordinary mode of speaking, leaving to each one his own man- 
 ner ; yet we do not thereby deny that the Holy Spirit suggested the 
 particular words to these individuals." 
 
 Cal., however (I, 574), remarks: "The Holy Spirit, supreme au- 
 thor of the Holy Scriptures, was not bound to the style of any one, but, 
 as a perfectly free teacher of languages, could use, through any person 
 soever, the character, style, and mode of speech that he chose, and 
 could just as easily propose the divine oracles through Jeremiah in a 
 highly adorned style, as through Isaiah in one of great simplicity. But 
 he regarded not 'so much the ability of the writers to speak as the 
 character of the subjects concerning which he wished them to speak ; 
 and, throughout the whole, he used his own authority (avre^ovma) under 
 the guidance of his unlimited wisdom. So that we need not wonder 
 that the same Spirit employed diversities of style , . . . The cause of 
 this diversity of style is the fact that the Holy Spirit gave to each one 
 to speak as he pleased." Yet Cal. adds also : "Although the style of 
 Scripture is plain and very well suited, not only to the genius of the 
 readers and hearers, but also to the old and customary style of speech of 
 the sacred writers, yet there may be recognized in it a condencension, 
 cvyicaTa(3aoig,o£ the Holy Spirit; because he accommodated himself some- 
 times to the ordinary method of speaking, leaving to the writers their 
 own style of speech ; but it must not be denied that the Holy Spirit 
 
REVELATION AND INSPIRATION. 59 
 
 breathed into them the words." The inspiration of the Hebrew vowel- 
 points was included in this theory; conf. Grh.'s argument ex absurdo 
 (II, 272): " It would follow that the Scriptures were not communi- 
 cated by God through the prophets, so far as the single words are con- 
 cerned, since without the vowel-points the words cannot possibly exist ; 
 therefore not all Scripture is inspired." From the theory of verbal in- 
 spiration there arose also the assertion: "The style of the New Testa- 
 ment is free from every trace of barbarism and from solecisms." 
 (Quen., I, 82.) The proof of verbal inspiration was drawn, 1. From 
 2 Tim. 3:16. (All Scripture is wholly inspired; not only its meaning, 
 or the thing signified, but also the words, as signs of things, were di- 
 vinely inspired. Therefore, etc., etc. (Holl., 85.)) 2. From 1 Cor. 
 2:13; Ex. 34 : 27, 28 ; Matt. 5 : 18. 
 
 [10] Inspiration is, therefore, a divine agency employed in connec- 
 tion with the recording of the truth, and, in several respects, it differs 
 from revelation. 
 
 If we consider the latter as embracing the whole compass of Christian 
 faith, it owes its very existence to inspiration. Cal. (I, 280) : " Di- 
 vine inspiration may be regarded either as the source and efficient cause 
 of revelation, in which sense it is an act of God inspiring, or as the 
 form which revelation assumes, or the revealed Word." But if revela- 
 tion be taken in its etymological sense, as the communication of that 
 which was before unknown, then it differs from inspiration in the follow- 
 ing respects : 1. The latter may contain also that which was before 
 known, merely specifying the particular time and manner in which it is 
 to be consummated, and, 2. The subject-matter of revelation may be 
 communicated to man in various ways, but that of inspiration only by 
 an immediate divine suggestion. Quen. (I, 68) : "Revelation, formally 
 and etymologically viewed, is the manifestation of things unknown and 
 hidden, and can be made in many and various ways, viz., by outward 
 speech, or by dreams and visions. Inspiration is that act of the Holy 
 Spirit, by which an actual knowledge of things is supernaturally con- 
 veyed to an intelligent creature, or it is an internal suggestion or infu- 
 sion of conceptions, whether the things conceived were previously 
 known to the writer or not. The former could precede the commit- 
 ment to writing, the latter was always associated with it and influenced 
 the writing itself." Add to this the remarks : " With all this I do not 
 deny that divine inspiration itself may be called revelation, in a certain 
 sense ; in so far, namely, as it is a manifestation of certain circumstances, 
 as also of the order and manner in which certain things are to be writ- 
 ten. (We must distinguish between divine revelation when by it the 
 
60 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 subject-matter itself is made known, and when it refers to the peculiar 
 circumstances and time and manner and order in which the subject- 
 matter is to be reduced to writing." (I, 72)) " And when, also, revela- 
 tion concurs and coincides with divine inspiration, when, viz., the di- 
 vine mysteries are revealed by inspiration and inspired by revelation, in 
 the very act of writing. Thus Calovius very properly remarks : ' That 
 all the particulars contained in the Sacred Scriptures are not, indeed, 
 to be regarded as having been received by a peculiar and new revela- 
 tion, but by the special dictation, inspiration, and suggestion of the 
 Holy Spirit.' " 
 
 [11] Holl. (88) : " Divine inspiration, by which the subject-matter 
 and the words to be spoken, as well as those to be written, were imme- 
 diately suggested to the prophets and apostles by the Holy Spirit, pre- 
 served them free from all error, as well in the preaching as in the writ- 
 ing of the divine Word." 
 
 Cal. (I, 551) : " No error, even in unimportant matters, no defect 
 of memory, not to say untruth, can have any place in all the Sacred 
 Scriptures." * 
 
 Quen. (I, 80) : " We are to distinguish between the conversation of 
 the apostles and their preaching and writing ; or between infirmities in 
 conduct and errors in doctrine. In doctrine the apostles never could 
 err, after receiving the gift of the Holy Spirit, . . . but in their con- 
 duct and outward conversation they were not sinless (avajudpTTjroi) , but, in 
 consequence of innate original corruption, were still subject to infirmi- 
 ties and failings." 
 
 The more accurate development of the doctrine of inspiration begins 
 with Grh. Hut. (Loci Theologici (30)) still thus briefly expresses 
 himself in regard to it: "Although God did not directly write the 
 Scriptures, but used prophets and apostles as his pen and instrument, 
 yet the Scripture is not, on that account, of any the less authority. 
 For it is God, and indeed God alone, who inspired the prophets and 
 apostles, not only as they spoke, but also as they wrote ; and he made 
 use of their lips, their tongues, their hands, their pen. Therefore, or in 
 this respect, the Scriptures also, as they are, were written by God him- 
 self. For the prophets and apostles were merely instruments." This 
 contains, however, essentially everything that we have adduced above 
 from the later theologians. It was mainly the controversy with the 
 Roman Catholics that gave occasion to detailed specifications ; for these 
 very well knew that they would rob the Protestant Church of all its 
 weapons, without thereby injuring themselves, if they could cast suspi- 
 cion upon the true inspiration of the Holy Scriptures. And then such 
 
AUTHORITY OF THE SCRIPTURES. 61 
 
 discriminations were also called iorth in part by the fanatics, who 
 treated the written Word of God with little respect ; partly by the So- 
 cinians and Arminians, who adhered to a merely partial inspiration of 
 the Scriptures. In opposition to these, it became of great importance 
 to the Lutheran theologians to defend with all earnestness the doctrine, 
 not only of the real, but also of the verbal inspiration. 
 
 § 7. The Attributes of the Sacred Scriptures. 
 
 If the Sacred Scriptures be really the Word of God, then it 
 follows that we are bound to yield to them implicit faith and 
 obedience. As they are the only source of truth, they must con- 
 tain this entirely and so clearly that we can really learn it from 
 them. And they are, finally, as the Word of God, the only 
 means by which we can attain unto faith, and, therefore, must 
 also be able to awaken this faith in us. We ascribe to them, 
 therefore, the attributes of authority, perfection or sufficiency, 
 perspicuity and efficiency. [1] 
 
 § 8. (1.) Authority. 
 
 Br.: " The authority of the Sacred Scriptures is the manifest 
 dignity that inclines the human understanding to assent to their 
 instructions, and the will to yield obedience to their commands." 
 We believe what the Holy Scriptures declare simply because 
 they declare it, and it is they that beget faith in us, and they are 
 the only source from which we derive our faith. They are. at 
 the same time, the only inspired book, and by this they are dis- 
 tinguished from all other writings. So that it is only from them 
 that we can learn what is true in divine things ; and they furnish 
 the means by which we can everywhere distinguish between 
 truth and error. The authority of Sacred Scripture is, accord- 
 ingly, divided into : " (a) Causative authority, by which the Scrip- 
 tures create and confirm in the mind of man assent to the truths 
 to be believed, (b) Normative or canonical authority, by which 
 authentic Scripture is distinguished from other writings and ver- 
 sions, and that which is true from that which is false." [2] Holl. 
 (104.) 
 
 (a) Causative Authority. This rests upon the fact, that we 
 acknowledge God as the author of the Sacred Scriptures, [3] and 
 
62 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 this we prove by the inspiration of the Sacred Scriptures. [4] 
 The proofs of inspiration are, it is true, derived in the first in- 
 stance only from the Sacred Scriptures themselves, and already 
 presuppose faith in the Sacred Scriptures themselves, on the part 
 of those who admit them as evidence. But, for the Church and 
 her members, there, is no need of proof for the inspiration of 
 Scripture, for her very existence depends upon this faith, and 
 this faith precedes all proofs; [5] without this no article of faith 
 would be based upon the Sacred Scriptures. [6] Therefore, the 
 proof that the Sacred Scriptures are inspired, or what amounts 
 to the same thing, that they are of divine origin, and conse- 
 quently possess full authority in matters of faith, is required only 
 for those who are yet without the Church, or who, if within her 
 pale, are not confirmed in the faith. But it lies in the nature of the 
 case, that no proof can be given to those, which they cannot, in an 
 unbelieving frame of mind, evade; for the only absolutely strin- 
 gent proof lies in the fact, that the Holy Spirit bears witness in the 
 heart of each individual, and thus convinces him of the divinity 
 of the Word of God, by the mighty influence which it exerts 
 upon him; [7] but that this may be the case, it is necessary that 
 the individual do not resist the drawings of the Holy Spirit, and 
 before this takes place the testimony of the Holy Spirit can have 
 no probative power for him. [8] To this experience, therefore, 
 the individual is referred, and through it alone will he attain to 
 absolute certainty in regard to the divinity of the Sacred Scrip- 
 tures. All other so-called proofs are rather to be considered as 
 such evidences for the divinity of the Sacred Scriptures as can 
 make this probable to the individual, and invite him to give 
 himself up to the influence of the Holy Spirit, in order to ac- 
 quire for himself the same experience which the Church has 
 gained. [9] Such evidences are of two kinds. The Sacred Scrip- 
 tures themselves testify in regard to this divinity, by their internal 
 excellence and dignity (npiTrjpia interna, internal proofs); and the 
 effects which the Sacred Scriptures have produced upon others, 
 testify also to the same [npiT^pia externa, external proofs). [10] 
 These evidences the Church holds out to each individual, and 
 seeks by their means to induce him to yield his heart to the in- 
 fluence of the Holy Spirit, who will produce in him the full con- 
 viction of the divinity of the Sacred Scriptures. [11] 
 
AUTHORITY OF THE SCRIPTURES. 63 
 
 (b) Normative or Canonical Authority. HoLL. (125): "The 
 canonical authority of Scripture is its supreme dignity, by which, 
 in virtue of its meaning, as well as of its divinely inspired style, 
 it is the infallible and sufficient rule, by which all that is to be 
 believed and done by man in order to secure eternal salvation, 
 must be examined, all controversies in regard to matters of faith 
 decided, and all other writings adjudged." [12] Accordingly, we 
 must acknowledge the Sacred Scriptures as the only rule and 
 guide of oar life, by which alone all controversies in regard 
 to divine things must be settled, [13] so that in no case is the ad- 
 dition of any other authority required, by which they may be 
 decided. [1-4] But if the Sacred Scriptures are thus the only 
 judge of controversies, the question arises: How is this decision 
 to be obtained from them? It lies in the nature of the case, that 
 not every one can accomplish this with equal success, for certain 
 previous conditions are required for this purpose, without which 
 the Sacred Scriptures cannot be understood and expounded ; and 
 besides, necessary ecclesiastical order demands that at least for 
 the public investigation and announcement (offentliche Erhtbuny) 
 of the decisions contained in the Sacred Scriptures, there should 
 be a regular calling. Hence, it pre-eminently belongs to the 
 Church publicly to make known, by means of her representa- 
 tives (ihe clergy), the decision discovered in the Sacred Scrip- 
 tures, in reference to a contested point, [15] whence, however, it 
 does not yet follow, that every private individual within the pale 
 of the Church does not possess the right of private judgment. [16] 
 If then, in certain cases, the adjustment of a controversy be not 
 attained, the fault lies not in the Sacred Scriptures, but in the 
 fact that the Sacred Scriptures were not properly interpreted, or 
 the proper interpretation was not adopted. [17] But, in every 
 case, when such a controversy is to be decided, resort must be 
 had to the original text of the Sacred Scriptures ; for, although 
 a good translation may enable us to secure the testimony of the 
 Holy Spirit, it is never so accurate, that we dare employ it in 
 doubtful cases, in which often everything depends upon the most 
 accurate investigation of the single words of the original text. [18] 
 
 [1] The attributes are variously enumerated by the early divines. 
 Cal. and Qlex. add to those we have mentioned, infallible truth, the 
 
64 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 power of interpreting itself, normative and judicial authority, which are 
 again by others incorporated in those we have mentioned. 
 
 Some theologians also add the following as secondary attributes: (1) 
 " Necessity ; or, that it was necessary for the Word of God to be com- 
 mitted to writing, in order to preserve the purity of the heavenly doc- 
 trine. (2) Integrity and perpetuity ; or, that the Sacred Scriptures 
 have been preserved entire, and will be thus perpetually preserved. 
 
 (3) Purity and uncorrupted state of its sources ; or, that the Hebrew 
 text in the Old Testament, and the Greek in the New, have not suffered, 
 in all copies, any corruption, either through malice or carelessness, but 
 have been preserved by Divine Providence, free from all corruption. 
 
 (4) Authentic dignity ; or, that the Hebrew text alone of the Old Tes- 
 tament, and the Greek of the New, is to be regarded as authentic, nor 
 is any version to be counted worthy of such supreme authority. (5) 
 The liberty of all to read for themselves." — Cal., I, 450. 
 
 [2] Br. (82): " The authority of Scripture, so far as it regards the 
 assent that is to be yielded to its declarations, may be viewed in a two- 
 fold light: first, in a strict sense, in order to cause assent to the things that 
 are to be believed, which right the Scriptures hold because they are the 
 source of knowledge and the formal object of faith and revealed theology; 
 secondly, in order to distinguish by the inspired. Scriptures themselves, both 
 the tine Scriptures and those other teachings, which relate to matters of 
 faith and practice ; and this right they hold, inasmuch as they are canon- 
 ical, or the rule and guide whereby to distinguish truth from falsehood. 
 . . . For, although the authority of Scripture is one and the same, based 
 upon the veracity of God and the dependence of the Scriptures upon 
 God, through which it is appointed, both in a formal sense to produce 
 faith and in a normal sense to examine and decide between certain 
 Scriptures and other teachings ; and as, further, the Scriptures are to be 
 employed somewhat differently for the formal purpose of causing assent 
 to the faith, and when used for the normal purpose of distinguishing 
 truth from falsehood ; thus, also, we must by all means treat distinctly 
 of both these methods in discussing the authority of Scripture." Holl. 
 (105): "In the former method, they (the Holy Scriptures) are employed 
 in every language for producing faith in the mind of an unbelieving 
 man, and of confirming it in the mind of a believer; in which respect 
 this authority is called causative or promotive of faith ; in the latter 
 method they are employed only in the original text, to distinguish, from 
 the actually inspired Scripture, the versions of the Hebrew and Greek 
 originals, the Symbolical Books, and all writings that treat of matters of 
 faith and practice." 
 
AUTHORITY OF THE SCRIPTURES. 65 
 
 [3] Br. (80) : " The authority of Scripture, viewed in itself and 
 absolutely, or with reference to its contents, depends upon God, the 
 sole Author of Scripture, and results from his veracity and great and 
 infinite power." Grh. (II, 36): " Inasmuch, then, as the Sacred 
 Scriptures have God for their author, by whose immediate inspiration 
 the prophets, evangelists, and apostles wrote, therefore they also possess 
 divine authority, because they are inspired (Oeb-vevG-og}, they are in like 
 manner (avrd-icroT.To -icrbv ao' eavr?]- exovoa) self-commendatory, winning 
 faith by virtue of their own inherent excellence." 
 
 [4] Br. (81): " So far as we are concerned, or that we may be con- 
 vinced, that the Holy Scriptures are worthy to receive faith and obedi- 
 ence, not only these perfections of God must be known, but also the de- 
 pendence of Scripture upon God, or its inspiration by him (deo-veva-ogy' 
 Our conviction, however, rests upon the two theses : " (1) Whatsoever 
 Scripture is recorded by divine inspiration, that is certainly and infalli- 
 bly true. (2) The Holy Scriptures were recorded by divine inspira- 
 tion." 
 
 [5] Grh. (I, 9) : " Those who are within the pale of the Church do 
 not inquire about the authority of Scripture, for this is their starting- 
 point. How can they be true disciples of Christ if they pretend to call 
 in question the doctrine of Christ ? How can they be true members of 
 the Church if they are in doubt concerning the foundation of the 
 Church ? How can they wish to prove that to themselves which they 
 always employ to prove other things ? How can they doubt concerning 
 that whose efficacy they have experienced in their own hearts? The 
 Holy Spirit testifies in their hearts that the Spirit is truth, t. e., that 
 the doctrine derived from the Holy Spirit is absolute truth." 
 
 [6] Grh. therefore very properly observes, that the doctrine of the 
 authority of Scripture is no article of faith, but rather the fountain-head 
 of the articles of faith. (I, 11) : u The doctrine concerning the canon 
 is. properly speaking, not an article of faith, since Moses, the prophets, 
 evangelists, and apostles did not fabricate in their writings a new article 
 of faith superadded to the former, which they taught orally." 
 
 [7] Grh. (II, 37) : "The first (testimony) is the internal witness of 
 the Holy Spirit, which as He bears witness to the spirit of those that be- 
 lie* e that they are the sons of God, Rom. 8:16, so, also, He efficaciously 
 convinces them, that in the Scriptures the voice of their Heavenly 
 Father is contained, and God is the only fit and authentic witness. To 
 this testimony belongs the lively sense of the godly in daily prayer, and 
 the exercises of penitence and faith, the grace of consoling and strength- 
 ening the mind against all kinds of adversities, temptations, persecu- 
 
66 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 tions, etc., etc., which the godly daily experience in reading and medi- 
 tating upon Scripture." 
 
 Quen. (I, 97) : " The ultimate reason by and through which we are 
 led to believe with a divine and unshaken faith that God's Word is 
 God's Word, is the intrinsic power and efficacy of that Word itself, and 
 the testimony and seal of the Holy Spirit, speaking in and through 
 Scripture. Because the bestowment of faith, not only that by which we 
 believe in the articles, but even that by which we believe in the Scrip- 
 tures, that exhibit and propose the articles, is a work that emanates 
 from the Holy Spirit or the Supreme Cause." 
 
 Holl. (116) : " By the internal testimony of the Holy Spirit, is here 
 understood the supernatural act of the Holy Spirit through the Word of 
 God, attentively read or heard (his own divine power being communi- 
 cated to the Holy Scriptures), moving, opening, illuminating the heart 
 of man ; and inciting it to obedience unto the faith, so that man, thus 
 illuminated by internal, spiritual influences, clearly perceives that the 
 word proposed to him has indeed proceeded from God, and thus gives 
 it unyielding assent." The Scripture proof for the testimony of the Holy 
 Spirit is deduced from 1 John 5: 6; 1 Thess. 1: 5, 6; 2; 13. To the 
 common objection that Theology here reasons in a circle, the following 
 answ r er is returned, Holl. (119) : " If I inquire, says the objector, how 
 do you know that the Scriptures are divine? The Lutherans answer: 
 1 Because the Holy Spirit in each one testifies and confirms this by the 
 Scripture.' If I ask again : * How do you prove that this Holy Spirit 
 is divine ?' The same persons will reply : ' Because the Scriptures 
 testify that he is divine, and his testimony infallible.' To all of which 
 we reply : We must distinguish between a sophistical circle and a 
 demonstrative retrogression. In reasoning in a circle, one unknown 
 thing is employed to prove another equally unknown; but in a demon- 
 strative retrogression, we proceed from confused knowledge to that 
 which is distinct. For the divine dignity of Scripture is proved by the 
 supernatural effect of the Holy Spirit operating efficaciously through the 
 Scriptures, illuminating, converting, regenerating, renewing. But, if 
 you ask whether that spirit be divine or malignant, then we reason from 
 the effect, which is divine and salutary, that the Spirit, who bears wit- 
 ness within, concerning the divine origin of the Sacred Scriptures, is 
 divine, most holy, and excellent." Quen. (I, 101) further adds: 
 " The Papists, therefore, wrongly accuse us of reasoning in a circle, 
 when we prove the Sacred Scriptures from the testimony of the Holy 
 Spirit, and the testimony of the Holy Spirit from the Sacred Scriptures. 
 Else would it be also reasoning in a circle when Moses and the prophets 
 
EXTERNAL CRITERIA OF INSPIRATION. 67 
 
 testify concerning Christ, and Christ concerning Moses and the proph- 
 ets ; or, when John the Baptist testifies that Christ is the Messiah, 
 and again Christ that John the Baptist is a prophet." 
 
 [8] Therefore Grh. (II, 36) distinguishes, among those who stand 
 without the pale of the Church, two classes: " Some are curable who 
 come with minds tempered and desirous of learning, others are incur- 
 able who come with minds unyielding and obstinate, and who contuma- 
 ciously resist the truth, Acts 13 : 46; 19 : 28. The incurable, just as 
 those who are past recovery, are to be forsaken to their fate, Titus 3 : 10. 
 The same applies to those who are within the pale of the Church, if, in 
 the midst of temptation, they begin to doubt the authority of the Scrip- 
 ture." 
 
 [9] Quen. (I, 98) : " Those arguments both of an internal and ex- 
 ternal nature, by which we are led to the belief of the authority of 
 Scripture, make the inspiration of Scripture probable, and produce a 
 certainty not merely conjectural but moral, so that to call it in question 
 were the work of a fool ; but they do not make the divinity of Scrip- 
 ture infallible, and place it beyond all doubt, nor do they convince the 
 mind internally ajueraTrrurug- ml apera/civr/ruc , i. e., they beget not a divine, 
 but merely a human faith, not an unshaken certainty, but a credibility, 
 or a very probable opinion. " 
 
 [10] Grh. (II, 37) : " I. The internal criteria (apcri/pia} inherent in 
 the Scriptures themselves, some of which are found in the causes, others 
 in the effects, some in the subject-matter, others in incidental circum- 
 stances ; such criteria are antiquity, the majesty of the subjects dis- 
 cussed, peculiarity of style, harmony of all its parts, dignity of its pre- 
 dictions concerning future events, the truth of their fulfilment, divinity 
 of the miracles by which that doctrine is confirmed, the violence of the' 
 diabolical opposition to it, the efficacy of Scripture itself in persuading 
 and moving to action. II. The external testimonies (which can be drawn 
 from all classes of men), among which is pre-eminent the testimony of 
 the Church, to which we may add that of the martyrs, who sealed the 
 doctrine taught in Scripture with their blood. Also, the punishment of 
 blasphemers and persecutors, who contumaciously opposed this doctrine." 
 
 The later divines present these proofs in substantially the same man- 
 ner as Holl. (106) : " The external criteria (which are not taken from 
 Scripture, but elsewhere derived) are (a) the antiquity of Scripture ; 
 (b) the singular clearness of the sacred writers, their desire after knowl- 
 edge and truth ; (c) the splendor of the miracles by which the heavenly 
 doctrine is confirmed; (d) the harmonious testimony of the Church, 
 spread over the whole earth, to the divinity of the Sacred Scriptures ; 
 
68 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 (e) the constancy of the martyrs; (/) the testimony of other nations 
 to the doctrine contained in the Sacred Scriptures ; (g) the successful 
 and rapid propagation of the Christian doctrine through the whole 
 ■world, and its wonderful preservation during so many persecutions ; 
 (Ji) the extremely severe punishments inflicted upon the despisers and 
 persecutors of the Divine Word." In reference to these, Holl. re- 
 marks (109) : " We premise these external criteria, in order to prepare 
 the minds of the unbelieving for reading and meditating upon the 
 Sacred Scriptures with interest and desire ... it is necessary that first 
 of all unbelievers be led by external criteria to regard it as not im- 
 probable that the Sacred Scriptures had their origin in God, and there- 
 fore begin to respect, read, and meditate upon them." 
 
 The internal criteria (" drawn from the intrinsic nature and attributes 
 of Scripture," Br.) are : " («) the majesty of God, testifying concern- 
 ing himself in the Sacred Scriptures ; (5) the simplicity and authority 
 of the biblical style ; (c) the sublimity of the divine mysteries which 
 the Scriptures reveal; (d) the truth of all biblical assertions; (e) the 
 sanctity of the precepts contained in the Sacred Scriptures; (/) the 
 sufficiency of the Sacred Scriptures to salvation." In regard to these, 
 Holl. further adds : " These internal criteria, taken together and con- 
 jointly, constitute a stronger argument than if taken successively or 
 singly." 
 
 [11] Grh. (I, 9) : "Although the testimony of the Holy Spirit is 
 of the very highest importance, yet we are not to make a beginning 
 with it in the conversion of such men, i. e., they are not commanded to 
 wait until the Holy Spirit bears witness immediately in their hearts 
 concerning the authority of Scripture, but they are to be directed to 
 the testimony of the Church, which, in this respect, performs the part 
 of a preceptor to the unbelieving disciple. Just as, therefore, it is nec- 
 essary for a pupil first to believe, until he afterwards becomes able to 
 form an independent judgment concerning the things taught, so it is 
 necessary for an unbeliever (paganus) to yield assent to the testimony of 
 the Church, which is the first step towards ascertaining the authority of 
 Scripture ; then the internal criteria of antiquity, prophecies, etc., are 
 to be added. Yet the testimony of the Church alone is not sufficient to 
 convince an unbeliever of the divine authority of the Scriptures, since 
 he may, perhaps, still be in doubt whether this be really the true 
 Church of God. Wherefore, it is the duty of the preceptor not only 
 to propose precepts, but also to corroborate their truth ; thus it is not 
 sufficient for the Church to declare that these are divine Scriptures, 
 unless it accompany its declaration with reasons. Then at length it 
 
EXTERNAL CRITERIA OF INSPIRATION. 69 
 
 may follow that the Holy Spirit bears testimony in the heart of the in- 
 quirer, and proves the truth of his words." 
 
 The testimony of the Church varies in weight, according as it is de- 
 rived from the earlier or from the later Church. Grh. (I, 10) : " The 
 primitive Church, that heard the apostles themselves, excelled in being 
 the original recipients of the sacred books, in being favored with the 
 living instruction of the apostles, and with a number of miracles to 
 prove the authority of the canon ; the next age, in which the autographs 
 of the apostles were still preserved, excelled the former in the more 
 complete fulfilment of New Testament prophecies, and in the abundance 
 of versions of both Testaments into various languages, and the testi- 
 mony concerning the Sacred Scriptures extracted from various writings 
 of believers ; and it excelled the age succeeding it, by possessing the 
 autographs of the evangelists and apostles, the voice of the ancient 
 Church, and a number of miracles. The latest age of the Church ex- 
 cels both the others (although the autographs of the apostles are no 
 more), in the more perfect fulfilment of prophecy." 
 
 Occasion is here taken to protest against the Romish axiom, " All the 
 authority of Scripture depends upon the Church," and to guard against 
 such an interpretation being put upon what has been above stated. 
 Holl. (120): "The authority of the Sacred Scriptures neither depends 
 upon the Church for the divine, pre-eminent dignity in which its power 
 lies ; nor, in order that it may be known, does it need the testimony of 
 the Church, as the grand and ultimate source of proof for the divine 
 authority of Scripture, nor as the only and absolutely necessary argu- 
 ment." Grh. (II, 38) remarks (1): "It is one thing for the Church 
 to bear witness to the Scriptures and their authority ministerially, and 
 another to confer upon Scripture its authority dictatorially and judicially. 
 From the ministry and testimony of the Church, we are led to acknowl- 
 edge the authority of Scripture, but from this it by no means follows 
 that the authority of Scripture, either in itself, or in respect to us, de- 
 pends alone upon the authority of the Church ; because, when we now 
 have learned that the Scriptures are divine and contain the Word of 
 God, we no longer believe the Scriptures on account of the Church, 
 but on account of themselves ; because, viz., they are the voice of God, 
 which is avTolffieia, and hence, avr6marog i which we know must be be- 
 lieved on its own account and immediately. (2) It is one thing for us 
 to become acquainted with the authority of the Scriptures by the testi- 
 mony of the Church, and another, for the whole authority of the Scrip- 
 ture, so far as we are concerned, to depend solely upon the testimony of 
 the Church. The former we concede, the latter we deny; because, be 
 
70 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 side the testimony of the Church, we have two other classes of evidence 
 for the authority of Scripture, and in the same class, that embraces the 
 testimony of the Church, other external evidences derived from all 
 kinds of men may be adduced ; yet, at the same time, we do not deny, 
 that the testimony of the Church is to be preferred to all others in this 
 class. (3) It is one thing to speak of the testimony of the primitive 
 Church, which received the autograph of the sacred books from the 
 apostles, and handed down a credible testimony concerning them to 
 posterity, and another, to speak of the authority of the present Church." 
 
 Quen. (I, 93) notices, in addition, the objection of the Papists, "The 
 Church is more ancient than the Scriptures, therefore, it has greater 
 authority;" to which he replies: "We must make a distinction between 
 the Word of God contained in the Scriptures, and the act of writing 
 itself, or, between the substance of Scripture, which is the Word of 
 God, and its accident, which is the writing of it. The Church is prior 
 to the Scriptures, if you regard the mere act of writing, but it is not 
 prior to the Word of God itself, by means of which the Church itself 
 was collected. Surely the Scriptures, or the Word of God, is the foun- 
 dation of the Church, Eph. 2 : 20, but the foundation is older than the 
 building." 
 
 [12] Holl. (125): "The Sacred Scriptures exercise their highest 
 canonical authority, when a controversy arises concerning the truth of 
 a doctrine, and the truth is to be confirmed, and falsehood to be con- 
 futed ; but the Scriptures exert their faith-producing authority, as often 
 as the unbelieving are to be converted to the Christian faith, or the 
 weak faith of believers is to be strengthened." 
 
 [13] Grh. (I, 28): " The Sacred Scriptures are the rule of our faith 
 and life, therefore, also, the judge of theological controversies." (I, 30): 
 "Add to this, that all the qualities of a rule, properly so called, belong 
 to Scripture. For a rule should be certain, fixed, invariable, funda- 
 mental, suited to meet every case, always self-consistent. But these 
 qualities belong neither to tradition, nor the teachings of human reason, 
 nor the writings of the fathers, nor to the Pope, nor to the decrees of 
 councils, but to the Sacred Scriptures alone." Form. Conc. (Preface, 
 1): "We teach, that the only rule according to which all doctrines and 
 all teachers are to be estimated and judged, is none other than the pro- 
 phetic and apostolic writings of the Old and New Testaments." (Com- 
 pare also the remarks of Quen. (I, 150): "When we say that the 
 Sacred Scriptures are the only rule of faith and life, conformed to the 
 will of God, we do not speak of every age of the Church, for there was 
 a time when the Church was instituted and governed without the writ- 
 
THE SCRIPTURES THE ONLY RULE OF FAITH. 71 
 
 ten Word of God, the time, viz., before Moses; but we refer to that 
 age in which the first written canon was prepared, and especially con- 
 cerning New Testament times, in which all things necessary to faith 
 and the worship of God have been written down, and with great care 
 collected into the canon.") 
 
 Holl. (125) : "Asa rule of knowledge it performs a two-fold func- 
 tion, directive and corrective. For it directs the thoughts of the human 
 mind, so that they abide within the bounds of truth ; and it corrects 
 errors, inasmuch as it is properly its own rule of right and wrong. 
 Wherefore, the Sacred Scriptures are called the canon, or rule, partly 
 on account of their directive character, because the true faith aud pure 
 morals are learned from them ; partly on account of their corrective 
 character, since controversies in regard to the faith are decided by them, 
 and whatever is right and godly is retained, and what is erroneous and 
 ungodly is rejected." 
 
 Others, as Cal. and Quen., express this by a separate attribute, viz., 
 the normative and judicial authority. Cal. (I, 474): "The Sacred 
 Scriptures are a rule, according to which all controversies in regard to 
 faith or life in the Church should, and can be, decided (Ps. 19 : 7; Gal. 
 6:16; Phil. 3 : 16); and as a rule they are not partial, but complete 
 and adequate, because, beside the Scriptures, no other infallible rule in 
 matters of faith can be given. All others beside the Word of God are 
 fallible ; and on this account we are referred to the Sacred Scriptures as 
 the only rule (Deut. 4 : 2 ; 12 : 28 ; Josh. 23 : 6 ; Is. 8 : 20 ; Luke 16 : 
 29 ; 2 Pet. 1:19); to which, alone, Christ and the apostles referred as 
 a rule (Matt. 4 : 4 ; 22 : 29, 31 ; Mark 9 : 12 ; John 5 : 45 ; Acts 3 : 20; 
 13:33; 18: 28; 26: 22)." 
 
 [14] Hence, the two corollaries of Quen. (I, 158, 167): "(1) It 
 is therefore not necessary that there should be in the Church a supreme, 
 regularly appointed and universal judge, who, seated upon a visible 
 throne, is peremptorily to decide all strifes and controversies that arise 
 among Christians concerning faith and religion, and orally and specifi- 
 cally to pronounce sentence in regard to them. We cannot acknowledge 
 as such a judge either the Roman pontiff, or the fathers, or councils. 
 (2) Nor is the decision concerning the mysteries and controversies of 
 the faith to be granted to human reason, nor to an internal instinct or 
 secret spirit." 
 
 [15] Chjix. (Trid.): " The Church has the right and liberty of 
 .deciding." Grh. (II, 359): "If the Church is 'the pillar and the 
 ground of the truth,' and we are ' commanded to hear it' (1 Tim. 3 : 15 ; 
 Matt. 18 : 17), then all decisions in matters of faith belong to her." 
 
72 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 But the right which is hereby ascribed to the Church is carefully dis- 
 tinguished from that which belongs to the Sacred Scriptures. This is 
 usually done in the following manner: (1) The principal judge is the 
 Holy Spirit; the instrumental judge, the Sacred Scriptures ; the minis- 
 terial (inferior) judge, the clergy. In regard to the latter, however 
 (' whose duty it is to seek for the decision of the Supreme Judge as laid 
 down in Scripture, and from this to teach what is to be done, to inter- 
 pret this, and decide in accordance with it'), it is maintained ' that this 
 judge should not pronounce sentence according to his own will, but ac- 
 cording to the rule laid down by the Supreme Judge,' i e., according to 
 the Sacred Scriptures, which we call the decision of the Supreme Judge, 
 and the rule of the inferior judge, and the directive judge (Grh., II, 
 366). 
 
 And Quen. (I, 150): " An inferior decision (viz., of a teacher of the 
 Church) is nothing else than the interpretation, declaration, or annunci- 
 ation of a divine, decisive, and definitive judgment, and its application 
 to particular persons and things." Whence it further follows: "We 
 are able to decide by the decision of an inferior judge, not absolutely, 
 but if he pronounce according to the prescriptions of the divine law or 
 the Scriptures, and in so far as he shows that he decides according to 
 the Word of God. (Deut. 17 : 10.) Wherefore, we may appeal from 
 this inferior judge to the Supreme, but not conversely ', from the Supreme to 
 the inferior. The subordinate judge is, therefore, not absolute, but re- 
 stricted and bound by the decisions of the Supreme Judge as recorded 
 in Scripture. According to this distinction, the Sacred Scriptures are 
 called the judging Judge, or the Judge ad quern (to whom there is ap- 
 peal), and the Church the Judge to be judged, or the Judge a quo (from 
 whom there is an appeal)." 
 
 The Church is, therefore, it is true, a visible judge, but merely discre- 
 tive, who, in the exercise of sound judgment, distinguishes truth from 
 falsehood. She is, however, "not a judge, specially and strictly so called, 
 viz., authoritative and decisive, pronouncing sentence authoritatively, and 
 by virtue of the authority belonging to her, compelling the disputants to 
 acquiesce in the whole opinion she may propose without further investi- 
 gation." (Holl., 146.) 
 
 [16] Grh. (II, 359): " Whatever pertains to a spiritual person, may 
 be regarded as belonging to all the sons aud members of the Church. 
 The reason of this is, that by spiritual person, we understand not merely 
 the clergy, according to the nomenclature of the Papists, but all the 
 children of the Church, who are controlled by the Spirit of God. Rom. 
 8 : 9. That ' he that is spiritual judgeth all things.' 1 Cor. 2 : 15." 
 
THE SCRIPTURES THE ONLY JUDGE OF CONTROVERSIES. 73 
 
 Quen. (I, 150): " We assert that every believer, according to the 
 measure of the gift of God, can and ought to judge, not indeed, in all 
 controversies, but concerning the doctrines necessary to salvation, and 
 to mark the difference between brass and beans by his own discretive 
 judgment. Not that every one should follow his own notions, as the 
 Papists accuse our churches of doing, but that he should submit himself 
 to the judgment of the Holy Spirit, recorded in the Scriptures, and 
 examine all things according to the tenor of this decision, but leave to the 
 learned, the public decision of controversies. 1 Cor. 10: 15; 11:31; 1 
 Thess. 5: 19." 
 
 In accordance with this, a distinction is made between " the public 
 and the private ministerial (inferior) judge. The public judge is the 
 clergy, the private, each member of the Church, or private person." 
 
 [17] Gkh. (II, 367) : " We must distinguish between power and its 
 exercise. The Sacred Scriptures are indeed sufficient and adapted, by 
 virtue of their authority, and the perfection and perspicuity of their 
 character, to decide controversies; but, through the fault of human 
 weakness and wickedness, it happens that this effect does not always, 
 nor with all persons, follow their application; just as the Gospel is the 
 power of God unto salvation, to all such as believe, Rom. 1 : 16, yet, at 
 the same time, not all are actually converted and saved by the preach- 
 ing of the Gospel." Br. (161): "Doubtless, all controversies that 
 relate to matters of faith and practice, necessary to be decided and 
 known, can, in this way, be adjudged and decided; only, when an oc- 
 casion of controversy occurs, let those who are to engage in it, bring to 
 the task minds that are pious, truth-loving, and learned. For thus, 
 prejudice and partiality and evil feelings being laid aside, and the argu- 
 ments of both sides being duly weighed, according to the rule of Scrip- 
 ture, it easily becomes apparent, which is the true and which is the false 
 opinion, on account of the perspicuity of Scripture, which acts in this 
 case by virtue of its appointed office. But, as to other questions, either 
 side of which may be held without injury to the faith, their decision 
 ought not to be demanded, or expected to be so clear." 
 
 [18] Holl. (125) : u The causative authority of the faith differs from 
 the canonical authority of Scripture, because the Scriptures beget divine 
 faith, through the inspired sense, which sense of Scripture remains one 
 and the same, whether expressed in the original idiom of Scripture, or 
 in a version conformed to the original text. So that the illuminating 
 power, connected with the sense of Scripture, effectually manifests itself 
 in the production of faith, not only by means of Scripture in the origi- 
 nal tongues, but also through versions, provided the versions be perspic- 
 6 
 
74 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 uous and conformed to the authentic text. Such is Luther's version of 
 the Bible, which is used by believers in our churches, which, when read, 
 or heard, is as efficacious in causing assent to the faith, as if they would 
 read the Hebrew text of the Old Testament and the Greek of the New, 
 or heard it read and expounded by a teacher, although the words of 
 that version were not immediately inspired by God. But, that the 
 Scriptures may have canonical authority, it is necessary, that not only 
 the sense, but also the words, have been derived immediately from God. 
 For to canonical and normal authority in matters of doctrine and prac- 
 tice, an absolute certainty and infallibility in the words themselves is 
 necessary, which does not exist except in the original text of Scripture, for 
 this depends immediately upon divine inspiration. Versions are the 
 work of men, who, in translating the Scriptures, may have erred." 
 
 § 9. (2.) Perfection or Sufficiency of the Scriptures. 
 
 From the fact that the Sacred Scriptures are the Word of God, 
 it necessarily follows that all that is contained in them is per- 
 fectly true; from the fact that they are the only Word of God 
 given to us, it further follows that if we are at all to learn the 
 way of life it must be perfectly taught in the Sacred Scriptures, [1] 
 and this is what is meant by their perfection or sufficiency. Grh. 
 (II, 286): "That the Scriptures fully and perfectly instruct us 
 concerning all things necessary to salvation." [2] And, indeed, 
 so perfectly must everything necessary to salvation be contained 
 in the Sacred Scriptures, whether declared in express words or 
 to be learned inferentially, [3] that we never find occasion to 
 make up deficiencies from another source ; whence all doctrines 
 claiming to be derived from oral tradition are to be rejected. 
 Grh. (I, 25) : " Laying aside tradition, we are to adhere to 
 Scripture alone." [4] 
 
 [1] Holl. (173) distinguishes: "the perfection of Scripture {a) in 
 reference to the subject-matter, since no inspired book, received into 
 the permanent canon of the faith, perishes. (b) In reference to the 
 form, that no error has crept into the authentic text by the negligence 
 or perfidy of transcribers, (c) In reference to the end to be attained, 
 for it sufficiently teaches man all doctrines and moral precepts necessary 
 to salvation." Of the latter, viz., perfection as to the end to be accom- 
 plished, we are here speaking. Br. (136) : " We only assert that the 
 
SUFFICIENCY OF THE SCRIPTURES. 75 
 
 Scriptures are perfect in reference to the accomplishment of their end, 
 and in this opinion we all agree. Those things are said to be perfect 
 in reference to their end which want nothing that is necessary for the 
 attainment of that end. But the ultimate aim of Scripture is our sal- 
 vation ; the intermediate, faith in Christ." Of perfection in the second 
 sense, we have already spoken, under the head of inspiration. In re- 
 ference to perfection, in the first sense, Br. (135) remarks: " We do 
 not so much refer to the number of the books that ever were written by 
 the sacred penmen, of which some referred to by the names of their 
 authors or titles in the remaining books of Scripture are supposed to 
 have perished, but we refer to the perfection of the Scriptures that re- 
 main in regard to the accomplishment of their end. Moreover, also, as 
 to those books which some suppose to have perished, it is to be observed 
 that some of them have not really perished, but are still extant, under 
 different titles, it is true. . . . But what if some books written by the 
 sacred penmen did really perish, they were notwithstanding (1) not 
 written by Divine inspiration, but by human prompting; (2) they were 
 also rather historical than doctrinal ; at all events, or if it be (3) con- 
 ceded that inspired books have perished, it must be maintained that the 
 doctrines themselves are found with equal truth and fulness in the re- 
 maining books ; certainly (4) that no book which once by the intention 
 of the Holy Spirit formed a part of the canon or rule, perished, to the 
 detriment of the canonical Scriptures, so that they should cease to be 
 the adequate source and rule of faith and practice." 
 
 Geh. remarks, in addition, that the Sacred Scriptures are not now for 
 the first time to be regarded as perfect, since the canon of the Old and 
 New Testament has been closed. (II, 286) : " The perfection of the 
 Sacred Scriptures is to be estimated not by the number of the books, 
 but from the sufficiency of the doctrine necessary to be known, in order 
 to salvation. That which was written at any particular age of the 
 Church, constttuted a perfect canon, since the divine revelation was 
 perfectly developed, so far as that age required it, in those books. 
 Thus when only the books of Moses were extant, the Scriptures were 
 perfect, i. e., with respect to that age of the Church in which not many 
 revelations had been made which God wished to be committed to writ- 
 ing." 
 
 [2] Quen. (I, 102): " The Sacred Scriptures contain with perfect 
 fulness and sufficiency all things necessary to be known in order to 
 Christian faith and life, and therefore to the attainment of eternal sal- 
 vation." 
 
 This Grh. (II, 286, seq.): proves. "(1) From their plain designa- 
 
76 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 tion and title, Ps. 19:7. (2) From their efficient original cause, viz., 
 God, most wise and most perfect. (3) From the subject-matter. The 
 inspired Sacred Scriptures, comprehended in the prophetical and apos- 
 tolical books, contain the whole counsel of God concerning our salva- 
 tion, and unfold all the parts of Christianity in such a manner that 
 nothing need be added or subtracted. This is proved by Acts 20 : 27 ; 
 26 : 22 ; 2 Tim. 3 : 16, 17 ; Deut. 4 : 2 ; 12 : 32 ; Gal. 1:8; Rev. 
 22 : 18. (4) From their aim and effects." 
 
 [3] Cal. (I, 610): "We assert, that the Sacred Scriptures suffi- 
 ciently and adequately contain all things necessary to faith and a Chris- 
 tian life, yet so that we think that those things also in the Scriptures 
 should be clearly and sufficiently considered, which, according to the 
 words (avTo'Ae%si^ and according to the sense (Kara ryv didvocav^ are com- 
 prehended therein, and, as plain inferences, are drawn from those which 
 are clearly written ; so that there is no need of any unwritten tradition 
 to supply the defects of Scripture, or to collect and deduce from it those 
 things which are virtually contained in Scripture ; because without any 
 tradition they may all be obtained from Scripture alone." 
 
 Grit. (II, 286) : " We by no means say that the Scriptures are per- 
 fect in such a sense that all things which are necessary to be known for 
 faith and practice are contained in the Scriptures avrole^ei or nara pr/rov, 
 literally and in so many words, but some of them in substance, others 
 literally; or, what is the same thing, that some are contained in them 
 explicitly and others by implication, so that by legitimate and undeni- 
 able inference they can be deduced from them." Quen. (I, 102) thus 
 guards against the misapprehension of this remark : " We do not say 
 with the Papists that the Scriptures are perfect by implication or con- 
 tain all things necessary to faith, as in a root or germ, or common 
 source, or, as it were, in outline ... so that they do not themselves 
 really contain all things, but show whence and where they are to be 
 sought, with a reference to the Church and her traditions, from which 
 the defects of those doctrines which are wanting may be supplied." 
 
 [4] Hereby the papal doctrine of tradition is rejected which Chemn. 
 (Ex. Trid. I, 110) thus describes: "They pretend that many things 
 necessary to faith and practice were handed down by the apostles which 
 are not comprehended in Scripture. And presently they add another 
 aiTT/fza (gratuitous claim), that those things which are handed down and 
 observed in the Romish Church, and cannot be proved by any Scrip- 
 ture testimony, are the very ones which were orally transmitted by the 
 Apostles and not comprehended in Scripture." 
 
 Whence Holl. (178) : "Tradition is the instruction orally given by 
 
MEANING OF TRADITION. 77- 
 
 Christ and the Apostles, which is neither substantially nor literally con- 
 tained in Scripture, but by continuous succession is preserved in the 
 Church." To which is replied ; " We infer from the perfection of 
 Scripture that it needs in no way the aid of tradition in the articles of 
 faith necessary to salvation." (Grh. II, 307.) 
 
 Inasmuch as the word tradition was used in such different senses in 
 the Sacred Scriptures, and such various significations applied to it, the 
 Dogmaticians take occasion accurately to designate the sense in which 
 they reject tradition, and from this signification carefully to distinguish 
 those which in a certain sense they admit. Chemn. in Exam. Trid. I, 
 110 seq., marks eight different significations, viz.: 
 
 " (1) We designate as the first kind of traditions those things which 
 Christ and the Apostles orally delivered, and which were afterwards 
 committed to writing by the Evangelists and Apostles. They are often 
 called traditions. 
 
 " (2) The books of Sacred Scripture have been guarded by the 
 Church during an uninterrupted series of ages and in a connected and 
 sure succession, and they have been faithfully transmitted to posterity 
 and handed down, as if from hand to hand, unto us. 
 
 " (3) Irenaeus and Tertullian celebrate apostolical tradition ... 
 They do not, indeed, propose and prove any other doctrines of faith by 
 tradition than those which are contained in Scripture ; but they show, 
 and prove also by tradition, those same doctrines which are contained 
 in Scripture. 
 
 " (4) Concerning the exposition, the true sense or native meaning of 
 Scripture. 
 
 " (5) Because the fathers sometimes thus designate those doctrines 
 which are not contained in so many words and syllables in Scripture, 
 but are derived from clear Scripture testimony, by sound, certain, indis- 
 putable, and evident reasoning. 
 
 " (6) Because the term is applied to the universal consent of the 
 fathers. The phrase is common, ' by the tradition of the fathers' 
 (patres ita tradiderunt) . 
 
 " (7) Because when the ancients made mention of unwritten tradi- 
 tions they did not understand by them doctrines of faith to be received 
 without, over and above Scripture, even if they could not be proved by 
 any Scripture testimony, but they spoke concerning certain rites and 
 customs, which on account of their antiquity they ascribed to the Apos- 
 tles. 
 
 " (8) Traditions relating both to faith and practice, which cannot be 
 proved by any Scripture testimony, which nevertheless the Council of 
 
78 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Trent commands to be received and venerated with the same reverence 
 and pious teeling as the Scriptures themselves. " 
 
 Holl. (178) accordingly divides the traditions of the Church into 
 " ritual, historical, exegetical, evidential, and dogmatical." Only the 
 latter class is here referred to. Holl.: " We do not disapprove of all 
 the ritual traditions of the Church, only the theological rule observed 
 by Chemn. in his Exam. Cone. Trid. must be adhered to. viz., ' Let 
 the ceremonies in the Church be of an unessential nature, few in num- 
 ber, devout, and useful for edification, order, and decorum; let the obser- 
 vance of them be left free, so as to avoid giving offence/ and so that 
 they may be instituted, changed, or abrogated with a reference to edifi- 
 cation, to times, places, and persons. We admit historical tradition, 
 concerning the canon of Scripture, not as an infallible, but probable 
 argument. We receive with gratitude exegetical traditions, if namely 
 the interpretation of the fathers present no discrepancy with the scrip- 
 tural text, the proper use of the words, the context, and the analogy of 
 faith. We hold in high esteem evidential tradition, and confess with 
 Chemnitz that we differ from those who invent opinions that find no 
 supporting testimony in any age of the Church. We think also that 
 no doctrine that is new and at variance with all antiquity should be re- 
 ceived in the Church.'' The Symbolical Books treat only of the ecclesias- 
 tical or ceremonial traditions. The Aug. Conf. XV, Apology VIII, 
 and Form. Conc. X, discuss the questions: (1) In how far these are 
 admissible, which they answer affirmatively; and (2) Whether in the 
 Church nothing dare be taught, as nothing is believed, which is not 
 proved by an express declaration of Scripture ? which question, in the 
 light of Christian liberty, they deny. 
 
 Syncretism then gave occasion to further specifications in regard to 
 the idea of tradition. G. Calixttjs had said: "It should not be 
 doubted, that from the writings of the ancient Church, which are still 
 extant, the common belief of antiquity can be sufficiently ascertained, 
 and that should be regarded as apostolical, which they unanimously 
 teach and declare that they receive as apostolical." To which Cal. 
 (I, 327) replies : "Although some innovators differ from the Papists in 
 this, that they do not recognize any article of faith that is merely tra- 
 ditional and not contained in the Scriptures, or receive any doctrine as 
 taught by the Apostles, which is not written ; yet they side with thp 
 Papists in this, that they accept as the Word of God something not 
 written and handed down by the Apostles, and wish some apostolical 
 tradition, I know not what, handed down to us through the writings of 
 the fathers, to be regarded as the undoubted Word of God." And, 
 
 
PERSPICUITY OF THE SCRIPTURES. 79 
 
 page 330, the additional statement : "Although it is not to be doubted 
 that the Apostles taught not only by writings but also viva voce, and 
 that the word which they preached, no less than what is comprehended 
 in the Scriptures, is to be regarded as the undoubted Word of God, yet 
 we neither can, nor ousjht we to, gratify the Papists by teaching that 
 there is still extant some additional Word of God communicated by the 
 Apostles, and handed down from them to us, which should be received 
 as infallible and indubitable, along with the prophetical and apostolical 
 Sacred Scriptures." 
 
 § 10. (3.) Perspicuity. 
 
 If the Sacred Scriptures contain everything necessary to sal- 
 vation, and if they alone contain it, they must necessarily exhibit 
 it so clearly and plainly that it is accessible to the comprehension 
 of every one ; hence the attribute of Perspicuity is ascribed to 
 the Sacred Scriptures. Cal. (I, 467): " Because in those things 
 which are necessary to be known in order to salvation, the Scrip- 
 tures are abundantly and admirably explicit, both by the inten- 
 tion of God their Author, and by the natural signification of the 
 words, so that they need no external and adventitious light." 
 [1] But while such perspicuity is ascribed to the Sacred Scrip- 
 tures, it is not meant that every particular that is contained in 
 them is equally clear and plain to all, but only that all that is 
 necessary to be known in order to salvation is clearly and plainly 
 taught in them, [2] and that, if this be not expressed in all cases 
 with equal clearness, it can nevertheless be gathered from a col- 
 location of the passages bearing upon it. [3] It is also not main- 
 tained that the Sacred Scriptures can be understood without the 
 possession of certain prerequisites. On the other hand, such as 
 the following are required, viz., proper maturity of judgment, 
 the necessary philological attainments, an unprejudiced frame of 
 mind in the investigation of the sacred truth, and a will inclined 
 to embrace this truth in its purity. [4] Where these prerequisites 
 are wanting there can, as a matter of course, be no thorough un- 
 derstanding of the Sacred Scriptures, but in such a case the fault 
 does not lie in the Sacred Scriptures. [5] Where these exist, 
 however, a clear and accurate comprehension of the saving 
 truths contained in Scripture may be gained, which nevertheless, 
 
80 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 even in this case, is merely external and natural until, by the 
 illumination of the Holy Spirit, an internal apprehension of them 
 is effected, [6] as well as the power of heartily appropriating to 
 one's self the saving truths contained in Scripture. [7] Finally, 
 the perspicuity of the Sacred Scriptures is not to be so under- 
 stood as if the mysteries of the Christian faith were unveiled by 
 it ; on the other hand, these remain as they are, mysteries ; per- 
 spicuity consists only in this, that the Scriptures make known 
 the mysteries just as God wishes them to be made known. [8] 
 
 From what has here been said it further follows, naturally, 
 that in all cases in which the interpretation of a passage is 
 doubtful, the decision dare never be found anywhere else than 
 in the Scriptures themselves, whereby the faculty of self- interpre- 
 tation is ascribed to the Sacred Scriptures. [9] And, in this in- 
 terpretation, it is a fundamental principle that the doubtful pass- 
 ages are to be explained by those that are clear. [10] Inasmuch 
 now as all doctrines, necessary to be known in order to salvation, 
 are clearly taught in Scripture, so that we gain from them the 
 general substance of the Christian plan of salvation ; and inas- 
 much, further, as we can safely presuppose that the Sacred 
 Scriptures will not contradict themselves, we need only take care 
 that we do not derive from these doubtful passages a sense that 
 would conflict with the clearly revealed truths ; we must there- 
 fore interpret according to the analogy of faith. (Cal.: "The 
 analogy of faith is the consistency of the doctrine clearly revealed 
 in the Sacred Scriptures.") [11] To the interpretation of all 
 Scripture, whether doubtful or plain, the general rule applies, 
 that each passage contains but one original and proper sense, 
 that, namely, which is derived immediately from the words em- 
 ployed (the literal sense), which is to be ascertained in every case 
 by the use of the means above described [12] 
 
 [1] The fullest description of perspicuity we find in Br. (138) : 
 " Perspicuity, or that those things which are necessary to be believed 
 and done by man in seeking to be saved, are taught in Scripture in 
 words and phrases so clear, and conformed to the usage of speech, that 
 any man acquainted with the language, and possessed of a common 
 judgment, and paying due attention to the words, may learn the true 
 sense of the words, so far as those things are concerned which must be 
 
PERSPICUITY OF THE SCRIPTURES. 81 
 
 known, and may embrace these fundamental doctrines by the simple 
 grasp of his mind ; according as the mind of man is led, by the Scrip- 
 tures themselves and their supernatural light, or the divine energy con- 
 joined with them, to yield the assent of faith to the word understood 
 and the things signified." 
 
 The proof, according to Quex. (I, 121, 122): "(1) From Deut. 
 30 : 11, 12 ; Rom. 10 : 8 ; 2 Pet. 1:19; Ps. 19 : 8 ; 119 : 105 ; Prov. 
 6 : 23. (2) From the character of Scripture : (a) Because it has God 
 for its Author, who can speak perspicuously, and does not wish to speak 
 obscurely. He can speak perspicuously, for he formed speech and the 
 voice. To say that he wished to speak obscurely, would be nothing 
 short of blasphemy, (b) It gives wisdom to babes or the unskilled, 
 Ps. 19 : 7 ; 2 Tim. 3 : 15. (c) It reveals hidden mysteries, Rom. 
 16 : 25 ; 1 Cor. 2 : 9, 10 ; Col. 1 : 26, 27. (d) It was given for the 
 purpose that the will of God is here to be learned, and men informed in 
 regard to eternal life, John 20 : 31 ; Rom. 15:4. (e.) Because its pre- 
 cepts are to be read by all, Deut. 17 : 19 ; John 5 : 39." 
 
 [2] Grh. (I, 26) : " It is to be observed that when we call the 
 Scriptures perspicuous, we do not mean that every particular expression, 
 anywhere contained in Scripture, is so constituted that at the first 
 glance it must be plainly and fully understood by every one. On the 
 other hand, we confess that certain things are obscurely expressed in 
 Scripture and difficult to be understood . . . But this we do assert, 
 and endeavor in every way to prove, that the perspicuity of Scripture is 
 of such a nature that a certain and consistent opinion can be drawn 
 from them concerning the doctrines whose knowledge is necessary to 
 salvation." Whence it follows (II, 329) that " the knowledge of those 
 things, which are nowhere plainly and perspicuously revealed in Scrip- 
 ture, is not absolutely necessary to salvation." 
 
 Quex. (I, 118) : "We do not maintain that all Scripture, in every 
 particular, is clear and perspicuous. For we grant that certain things 
 are met with in the sacred books that are obscure and dvavoyra, or diffi- 
 cult to be understood, 2 Pet. 3: 16, not only in respect to the sublimity 
 of their subject-matter, but also as to the utterance of the Holy Spirit, 
 that afford materials for calling into exercise the learning of the doctors 
 during the course of a long life, and the full understanding of which is 
 to be expected only in heaven ; but that the doctrines of faith and moral 
 precepts are taught so obscurely everywhere, that they can nowhere be 
 found clearly and explicitly, it is this that we deny. But the articles 
 of faith and the moral precepts are taught in Scripture in their proper 
 places, not in obscure and ambiguous words, but in such as are fitted to 
 
82 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 them, and free from all ambiguity, so that every diligent reader of 
 Scripture, who reads it devoutly and piously, can understand them." 
 (Br. (140) : " At least in those places where the writer professedly, as 
 they say, treats of a particular precept of faith or morals, or where its 
 seat is ; so that there is no article of faith, or no moral precept, which 
 is not taught in Scripture somewhere in literal, clear, and conspicuous 
 language.") 
 
 Quen. (I, 18) distinguishes on the one hand between " onomastic, 
 chronological, topographical, allegorical, typical, prophetical (i. e., pre- 
 dictions, but unfulfilled) matters, and on the other hand between his- 
 torical, dogmatical, and moral. If in these, or especially in matters re- 
 lating to style and order, there should occur some difficulty or obscurity, 
 this would still not derogate from the perspicuity of Scripture. The 
 Scriptures give us elemental truths, containing the supreme and neces- 
 sary articles of our religion. They give us sublime, mystical, onomastic 
 truths. God chose to teach most clearly in the sacred books the ele- 
 mentary truths, because what is taught by them is necessary to be 
 known by all in order to salvation. Other matters are involved in 
 some difficulty." 
 
 [3] Grh. (II, 329) : " Observe, that some things in Scripture are 
 clearer than others, and what is obscurely expressed in one passage is 
 more clearly explained in another." 
 
 Quen. (II, 118): "It is one thing that there should at times be some 
 difficulty and obscurity in the statement of the mysteries of the faith and 
 of those things that must be known in order to salvation-; and another, 
 that this obscurity should be nowhere cleared up in the Scriptures 
 themselves, if a comparison be instituted with parallel passages and the 
 analogy of faith as contained in Scripture be called into requisition. 
 Doubtless what is expressed in one place obscurely, appears perfectly 
 clear in another ; and what in one passage is hidden under tropes and 
 figures, is elsewhere disclosed in plain and simple language; and thus 
 upon many difficult passages of Scripture, light is thrown by others that 
 are more clear." 
 
 [4] Grh. (II, 329): " Observe that, in asserting perspicuity, we do 
 not deny the godly study of the Scriptures by reading and meditation, 
 nor the use of the aids necessary to the interpretation of the Scripture." 
 
 Quen. (I, 119): "We are to distinguish between men who, on ac- 
 count of their immature age and their want of familiarity with the lan- 
 guage in which they read the Scriptures, meet with difficulty through 
 unskillfulness or ignorance, who are prejudiced by preconceived errone- 
 ous opinions, and those with whom this is not the case. . . . For we 
 
PERSPICUITY OF THE SCRIPTURES. 83 
 
 presuppose a sufficient knowledge of the language, maturity of age, a 
 mind not filled with prejudice and erroneous opinions, and also a legiti- 
 mate and good version of the original text." 
 
 Br. (146): ' ; For he who does not attend to the words themselves, 
 but follows his own prejudices and makes the words of Scripture con- 
 form to them, can err even in perspicuons passages and in investigating 
 the true sense." Whence Holl. (149): " The perspicuity of Scripture 
 is not absolute, but dependent upon the use of means, inasmuch as, in en- 
 deavoring to understand it, the divinely instituted method must be accu- 
 rately observed. For there is required : (1) Prayer to God, the Father 
 of lights. (2) A knowledge of the idiom in which the Sacred Scriptures 
 are contained, whether it be the original or in a version. (3) The at- 
 tentive consideration of the expressions, of the scope, of the previous 
 and subsequent context. (4) The laying aside of preconceived opinions 
 and of evil feelings, of ambition, hatred, envy, boldness, etc., etc." 
 
 [5] Wherefore Quex. (I, 118) distinguishes between " obscurity in 
 the object contemplated and that which lies in the subject contemplating 
 it. The Scriptures, especially in things necessary to salvation, are not 
 obscure in and of themselves, or through a want of native clearness and 
 plainness, but they are lucid and perspicuous. They may be obscure, 
 however, accidentally, on account of the incapacity and blindness of the 
 human mind, and through the malice of heretics and the heterodox, who 
 superadd to their natural blindness a voluntary one, and maliciously 
 close the eyes of their mind against the clearest light of Scripture. (2 
 Cor. 4 : 3.)" As an instance of this, the controversy in regard to the 
 Lord's Supper is cited (I, 124): " The words of the Testament are in 
 themselves very perspicuous, but are variously interpreted ; because 
 many, neglecting the literal and proper sense, studiously seek a foreign 
 one, and do not follow so much the teaching of Christ as the counsel and 
 dictation of blind reason. A mistake in the cause is therefore committed 
 when the discrepancy in the expositions is ascribed to the obscurity of 
 Scriptures, since its cause is either the perverseness or imbecility of 
 men. The obscurity which lies in the subject must not be transferred 
 to the object. ... If nothing be perspicuously spoken except that which 
 cannot be understood perversely and expounded in a bad sense, then 
 nothing in the wide universe can be perspicuously and plainly uttered." 
 
 [6] Gkh. (I, 26): " The clearness of Scripture is twofold; as Luther 
 says, ' One kind is external, lying in the ministry of the Word, the other 
 in the knowledge of the heart. If you speak of the internal clearness, 
 no man understands a single iota in the Scriptures by the natural powers 
 of his own mind, unless he have the Spirit of God ; all have obscure 
 
84 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 hearts. The Holy Spirit is required for the understanding of the whole 
 of Scripture and of all its parts. If you allude to the external clearness, 
 there is nothing left obscure and ambiguous, but all things brought to 
 light by the Word are perfectly clear.' " 
 
 Grh. (I, 52): " Some, who have not yet been enlightened by the 
 Holy Spirit, may have a knowledge of the Scripture doctrines, and 
 acquire an historic faith by the outward ministration of the Word; but 
 an absolutely certain, firm, and saving knowledge they cannot have 
 without the internal illumination of the mind by the Holy Spirit." 
 There is, therefore, a distinction made between the " grammatical (lit- 
 eral) and external" and the "spiritual, divine, and internal sense." Per- 
 spicuity in the first sense consists, Br. (140), "in the proper selection 
 of words and their correspondence with the things signified, and their 
 mutual connection and arrangement, according: to the common usage of 
 language" (141): "For not only the regenerated and believers, but 
 also the unregenerate and godless, through this clearness of the words 
 in their natural signification, in which respect they are the same for all 
 readers, can acquire a knowledge of the sense designed by the words, 
 t. e., a merely literal or historical, not a saving or believing knowledge." 
 Also (144), (from the Jena and Wittenberg Opinion, in answer to Rath- 
 mann's Reply, 1629): . . . "If the Reply means to infer that no uncon- 
 verted person can understand the proper sense which is contained in the 
 words of Scripture, and expressed by them, t. <?., the grammatical and 
 literal sense, unless the Holy Spirit assist with his gracious illumi- 
 nation, then we cannot agree with the Reply, but abide by our own 
 opinion. . . . For the words, and whatever serves to interpret them, 
 viz., the lexicons, dictionaries, and grammars of the Latin, Greek, and 
 Hebrew languages, are human inventions, and belong to the gifts of na- 
 ture and not to the gracious gifts of the Holy Spirit ; for he was not 
 appointed, nor was he poured out, that he might treat of grammatical 
 rules and teach the Hebrews to hunt up roots, . . . but that he should 
 teach us the articles of faith through the Scriptures and instruct us in 
 the truth that maketh wise unto salvation. Many a one properly under- 
 stands the words without possessing that saving knowledge of the mys- 
 teries which belongs to faith." 
 
 Cal. (I, 657): "Although the external sense of Scripture may be 
 understood by the unregenerate, yet the saving and internal sense, 
 joined with hearty assent, cannot be attained without the illumination 
 of the Holy Spirit." # 
 
 [7] Grh. (II, 338) : "A literal acquaintance with the articles of the 
 faith is not sufficient to salvation, but there must also be a spiritual 
 
PIETY ESSENTIAL TO AN INTERPRETER OF SCRIPTURE. 85 
 
 knowledge, for the acquisition of which the internal illumination of 
 the Holy Spirit is necessary, and this is to be obtained by humble 
 prayer." 
 
 Br. (150) : "In order that man may properly understand the plan of 
 salvation, two things are necessary : first, that by the natural powers of 
 his mind he comprehend those things that necessarily must be known 
 by him in order to his salvation ; and secondly, that he embrace these 
 thus apprehended as true and divinely revealed, and yield to them the 
 full assent of faith ; so that the Scriptures, which in this matter should 
 be as a bright and shining light, ought to accomplish these two ends : 
 first, to represent to the mind the things that are to be known in lan- 
 guage adapted to this end and clear, so that they may be simply and 
 naturally apprehended ; and secondly, that when the thing signified is 
 of a more exalted nature and the mind too weak or corrupt to be able 
 to judge correctly by the exercise of its own powers concerning that 
 which is signified by the words, or to elicit or yield the assent that is 
 due, the Scriptures themselves, by their own illuminative power, should 
 enable the mind to accomplish this and bestow the faculty of apprehend- 
 ing and embracing the truth." The latter alone is referred to when 
 Holl. remarks (155) : " An unregenerate man, opposing the illuminat- 
 ing grace of the Holy Spirit, cannot understand the true sense of the 
 sacred writings. But when an unregenerate man, in a teachable spirit, 
 attentively reads the Sacred Scriptures, or hears them expounded by 
 the living teacher, the Holy Spirit illuminates him by the Scriptures, so 
 that he may understand the true sense of the Divine word and rightly 
 apply it, thus understood, with saving effect." And although Holl. 
 claims "for the unregenerate but teachable the foregoing and prepara- 
 tive grace of the Holy Spirit, that they may acquire an external and 
 literal knowledge of the Sacred Scriptures," he does not thereby mean 
 anything more than that such grace is needed in order that they may 
 attain to a self-appropriation of the plan of salvation; for he elsewhere 
 remarks (158) : " The words of the Prophets and Apostles may be con- 
 sidered either out of their proper scriptural connection, or in it. In the 
 former case, they are analogous to human words, and can be understood 
 by the unregenerate without the grace of the Holy Spirit; but if they 
 be considered in their proper connection, as they are accommodated to 
 the mysteries of the faith, and are, as receptacles or vehicles of these, 
 really Divine words, no correct conception, conformed to the mind of 
 the Spirit, can be formed concerning them without the preceding and 
 preparative grace of the Holy Spirit." 
 
 [8] Holl. (149) : " The Scriptures are called clear, not in respect 
 
86 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 to the subject-matter, but to the words, for even subjects that are not 
 clear may be expressed with clear and perspicuous words." 
 
 Quen. (I, 117): "We must make a distinction between the clear- 
 ness of the subjects which are revealed in Scripture and the plainness 
 of the words by which the revealed subjects are expressed. We refer 
 not to the former but to the latter ; for we acknowledge that many mys- 
 teries are contained in the Scriptures, abstruse and impenetrable by the 
 human intellect, especially in this life; but we deny that they are taught 
 in Scripture in an obscure style and with ambiguous words." Luther 
 expresses it differently: "The things of God are obscure; . . . the 
 things of Scripture are perspicuous. . , . The doctrines in them- 
 selves are obscure ; but in so far as they are presented in Scripture they 
 are manifest, if we are willing to be content with that knowledge which 
 God communicates in the Scriptures to the Church." 
 
 [9] Quen. (I, 137) : " From no other source than the Sacred Scrip- 
 tures themselves can a certain and infallible interpretation of Scripture 
 be drawn. For Scripture itself, or rather the Holy Spirit speaking in 
 Scripture or through it, is the legitimate and independent (awKcv-Swog) 
 interpreter of itself." 
 
 And further, Quen. (I, 137) : " We cannot therefore acknowledge 
 the harmonious opinions of the ancient teachers of the church or the de- 
 cisions of councils as a certain and unquestionable rule and measure of 
 scriptural interpretation, nor the Roman pontiff as the supreme infallible 
 interpreter of the Sacred Scriptures." 
 
 [10] Quen. (I, 137) : "The more obscure passages, which need ex- 
 planation, can and should be explained by other passages that are more 
 clear, and thus the Scripture itself furnishes an interpretation of the 
 more obscure expressions when a comparison of these is made with those 
 that are more clear ; so that Scripture is explained by Scripture." 
 
 [11] Grh. (I, 53) : " From those perspicuous passages of Scripture 
 a rule of faith is gathered, which is, so to speak, a summary of the 
 heavenly doctrine extracted from the clearest passages of Scripture. 
 Whatever, therefore, is necessary, is clearly expressed in the Sacred 
 Scriptures, says Chrysostom. If certain things in them are very ob- 
 scure, the knowledge of these is not necessary to all for their salvation; 
 and hence, although we may not always ascertain their true and genuine 
 interpretation, it is sufficient if, in interpreting them, we propose noth- 
 ing that conflicts with the rule of faith." 
 
 (II, 424): "All interpretation of Scripture should be according to 
 the analogy of faith. This canon is taught in Rom. 12:6, and signi- 
 fies that the interpretation of Scripture should be instituted and carried 
 
ANALOGY OF THE FAITH. 87 
 
 on in such a manner as to accord with the usual line of thought which is 
 conveyed in Scripture concerning each article of the heavenly doctrine. 
 For, since all Scripture was given by the immediate suggestion of the 
 Holy Spirit, and is inspired, all things in it are harmonious (Gwa/.rjdfj) 
 and perfectly consistent with each other, so that no discrepancy or self- 
 contradiction occurs in it. The articles of faith, which the apostle here 
 means by ttiotiv, the knowledge of which is necessary for all in order to 
 salvation, are taught in the Scriptures in clear and perspicuous language, 
 of which a brief summary is contained in the Apostles' Creed, which 
 the fathers often call the rule of faith. Nothing is ever to be broached 
 in the interpretation of Scripture that conflicts with this rule of faith; 
 and hence, if we be not exactly able at times to ascertain the exact 
 sense of any passage, as designed by the Holy Spirit, we should never- 
 theless beware of proposing anything that is contrary to the analogy of 
 faith." 
 
 Gkh. (I, 54) thus states all the rules that apply to the interpretation 
 of the Sacred Scriptures : " (1) In understanding and interpreting the 
 Scriptures without the light of the Holy Spirit our mind is blind. (2) 
 In addition to this blindness, natural to us all, some are blinded by 
 peculiar wickedness and an unyielding obstinacy, whose eyes the Holy 
 Spirit either has opened or has wished to open, but they have contuma- 
 ciously resisted him ; neither of these kinds of blindness, however, 
 makes or proves the Scriptures obscure. (3) Because our mind is 
 blind, we are prayerfully to implore the light of the Holy Spirit. (4) 
 But this illumination of the mind, the Holy Spirit does not confer im- 
 mediately, but by the light of the TTord heard and meditated upon. (5) 
 Inasmuch as the doctrines necessary to be known by every one in order 
 to salvation are taught in Scripture in clear and perspicuous language. 
 (6) The remaining passages of Scripture receive light from these. (7) 
 For from the perspicuous passages of Scripture a rule of faith is deduced 
 to which the exposition of the remainder must be conformed. (8.) And 
 if we cannot ascertain the precisely literal sense of all passages, it is 
 sufficient that in their interpretation we do not propose anything 
 contrary to the analogy of faith. (9) Nevertheless, it is also of im- 
 portance that we rightly and accurately interpret the more obscure 
 passages of Scripture,- which can be done if we apply the means adapted 
 to remove the difficulties. (10) That we may discover these means, we 
 must seek the causes of the obscurity. (11) Some Scripture passages 
 are obscure in themselves, when singly considered, others when com- 
 pared with other passages ; if they merely seem to conflict with other 
 passages, this obscurity may be removed by reconciling the passages. 
 
88 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 (12) Those that are obscure in themselves and singly are so either 
 as to their subject-matter or as to their words. The obscurity in re- 
 gard to the subjects discussed is removed by those settled axioms, in 
 individual articles of belief, which are to be regarded as the unfail- 
 ing guide (cynosura, polar star). (13) The obscurity in regard to the 
 words is dispelled by the grammatical analysis of sentences, by the 
 rhetorical exposition of the tropes and figures, by the logical considera- 
 tion of the order and circumstances, and finally by an acquaintance 
 with physical science ; but the greatest assistance in all these cases is 
 afforded by a prudent and diligent collation of Scripture passages, 
 whenever either the same or different words and phrases are employed 
 to express the same or different things." And he illustrates the man- 
 ner of making deductions from the rule of faith by the example of the 
 doctrine of the Lord's Supper. 
 
 [12] Grh. (I, 67): "There is but one proper and true sense of 
 each passage, which the Holy Spirit thereby intends, and which is 
 drawn from the proper signification of the words, and only from this 
 literal sense available arguments may be derived." But this literal 
 sense may be either strictly literal, which the Holy Spirit intends when 
 the words are taken in their usual signification, e. g., God is a spirit 
 (John 4: 24), or figurative or tropicdl, which is the intention of the 
 Holy Spirit when words are used figuratively, e. g., God is our shield 
 (Gen. 15: 1), (Holl., 91). But in this case also the remark applies 
 Grh. (II, 425) : " All interpretation of Scripture should be literal 
 (propria), and there should be no departure from the letter in matters 
 of faith, unless the Scriptures themselves indicate the figurativeness 
 and explain it." (I, G7) : " Allegories, tropes, anagogies, are not dif- 
 ferent senses but different adaptations of the same sense and subject 
 designated by the letter. The same historical narrative may be pre- 
 sented in a variety of ways, and treated either allegorically, or tropi- 
 cally, or analogically, while the true and literal sense of the words in 
 which the history is described remains the same." The Dogmaticians 
 therefore assume, it is true, such a spiritual sense in certain cases, but 
 strictly speaking this is not understood as a second sense, co-ordinate 
 with the first, but only that the natural signification of the words, which 
 must always be the basis of the interpretation, admits also a special spiri- 
 tual application, or contain at the same time a symbolical allusion. 
 Holl. (91): "That is called the mystical sense which is not immedi- 
 ately signified by the inspired words, but which proceeds and is deduced 
 from the subject signified by the inspired words. It is, however, im- 
 properly and unauthorizedly called the sense of the biblical expression. 
 
 
BUT ONE TRUE SENSE OF SCRIPTURE. 89 
 
 since it is not the immediate sense of the inspired words, but inasmuch 
 as God desires, by means of the subject or fact described by those words, 
 to present some other subject or fact to the consideration of men. 
 More properly, therefore, it is called the accommodation of the literal sense, 
 or its mystical application, than the mystical sense of Scripture, e. g., 
 Jonah 2:1. Here the prophet Jonah is said to have been three days 
 and nights in the belly of the whale, and the literal sense is the one 
 plainly designed by God, expressed and immediately implied by the 
 words. When now this whole history or transaction is employed to 
 signify the abode of Christ for three days and nights in the grave, no 
 new sense here arises, but there is merely an accommodation and appli- 
 cation of that historical narrative so as by it to express the fact that 
 Christ was three days and nights in the grave. " Hence the Dogmati- 
 cians declare against the assumption of a double sense in the prophecies 
 of the Old Testament. Such a mystical sense may either be designed 
 by God, or it may be engrafted upon the literal sense. Only in the 
 former case dare it be employed in the interpretation of Scripture. 
 Cal. (I, 664): "The mystical accommodation may either be syypacpog- 
 (contained in the written Word) and divine, or aypa<pog- (superadded to 
 the written Word) and of human invention." (Holl. vel innata vel 
 illata, either innate or introduced.) 
 
 Quen. (I, 131): "When our theological writers approve ol the fol- 
 lowing scholastic axioms, viz., * Mystical theology can prove nothing, 
 parabolic theology cannot be advanced in argument, solid and eifective 
 arguments for proving the doctrines of the faith and refuting errors can 
 be drawn only from the literal sense of Scripture,' they do not exclude, 
 but at the same time include mystical applications of the literal sense of 
 this or that biblical passage, made by the Holy Spirit himself in the Sa- 
 cred Scriptures ; yet they exclude allegorical and parabolical interpreta- 
 tions that men have devised and forced upon the Scriptures. For ap- 
 plications of the literal sense of this or that passage or sacred narrative, 
 that are shown to exist and are explained in the Scriptures themselves,, 
 can be used in proof, just as other things that are literally expressed in 
 the Scriptures. When, therefore, in any plain Scripture passage there- 
 is an accommodation of the literal sense to a spiritual subject, then its 
 validity for proving or disapproving is just as great." " The mystical 
 sense, as it may be loosely styled, is divided by the Lutheran theolo- 
 gians into the allegorical, typical, and parabolical. It is called the alle- 
 gorical sense, when a Scriptural historical narrative of things that really 
 occurred is applied to a certain mystery or spiritual doctrine by the in- 
 tention of the Holy Spirit in an allegorical manner ; it is called typical 
 7 
 
90 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 ■when, under external facts or prophetic visions, things hidden, either 
 present or future, are prefigured, or especially matters relating to the 
 New Testament are shadowed forth ; and parabolical, when something 
 is described as having really occurred, and yet applied to designate 
 something else that is spiritual." (Cal. I, 665.) 
 
 The Romanists distinguish between the allegorical sense, the topo- 
 logical (when the words or facts under consideration refer to something 
 that relates to morals), and the anagogical (when the words or facts are 
 used with a reference to eternal life). 
 
 §11. (4.) Efficacy. 
 
 Cal. (I, 478): "That the Sacred Scriptures are living and 
 efficacious, and a means of illumination, conversion, and salva- 
 tion, prepared and vivified by Divine power." 
 
 This subject will be treated of subsequently under the head of 
 the Means of Grace. 
 
 § 12. Of the Canon and the Apocryphal Books. 
 
 The written Word of God consists of the Word of God of the 
 Old and the Word of God of the New Testament. [1] In the 
 collection, however, that contains both of these, we find also 
 other writings, which we do not call the Word of God in the 
 same sense. We distinguish these two kinds of writings in the 
 following manner, viz.: we call the first class canonical books, i. e., 
 such as, because they are inspired by God, [2] are the rule and 
 guide of our faith ; [3] the others, apocryphal hooks, i. e., such 
 whose divine origin is either doubtful or has been disproved„ [4] 
 Although both kinds are found in the Bible, only those of tha 
 first class are admitted as a rule of faith, whence they are called 
 the Canon (catalogue or number of the canonical books), while 
 those of the other class may contribute their share to the edifi- 
 cation of believers, but are not to be regarded as the Word of 
 God, and from them, therefore, no proof for any doctrine of the 
 faith is to be drawn. [5] 
 
 Whether a book is canonical or not, we are then to ascertain 
 by the signs whereby we recognize the Word of God in general 
 as such, as of divine origin, as inspired. [6] The testimony of 
 the Holy Spirit is more conclusive evidence than anything else 
 of the divine character of the contents of a book ; next to this 
 
EFFICACY OF THE SCRIPTURES. 91 
 
 come all the other kinds of evidence which we enumerated 
 ■under the head of the Authority of Holy Scripture (§ 8, Note 
 10) as the external and internal criteria. [7] Among the latter 
 the testimony of the Church in the earliest ages in regard to the 
 canonical character of a book is of special importance, for it is 
 assuredly a matter of the highest moment if we know that a 
 book was acknowledged as canonical already at a day when its 
 origin could be most accurately ascertained. [8] More particu- 
 larly do we need the testimony of the earliest ages of the Church 
 in deciding the historical questions, as to the name of the author 
 of a book, as to the language in which it was originally com- 
 posed ; [9] for by the testimony of the Holy Spirit we may in- 
 deed become assured of the divinity of a book, experiencing its 
 power in our own hearts, but he bears no testimony as to ques- 
 tions of this kind. 
 
 As canonical books of the Old Testament we acknowledge (1), 
 Genesis; (2), Exodus; (3), Leviticus; (-1), Numbers; (5), Deuter- 
 onomy; (6), Joshua; (7), Judges; (8), Euth ; (9), I and II Sam- 
 uel; (10), I and II Kings; (11), I and II Chronicles; (12), Ezra 
 and Nehemiah (or second Ezra); (13), Esther; (11), Job; (15), 
 Psalms; (16), Proverbs; (17), Ecclesiastes ; (18), Song of Solo- 
 mon; (19), Isaiah; (20), Jeremiah; (21), Lamentation; (22), 
 Ezekiel ; (23), Daniel; (21), twelve minor prophets, Hosea, Joel, 
 Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, 
 Haggai, Zachariah, Malachi. [10] 
 
 As apocryphal : Tobias, Judith, Baruch, I, II, and III Macca- 
 bees, III and IV Ezra, Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus or 
 Syracides. As appendices: Epistle of Jeremiah, annexed to 
 Baruch, Appendix to Daniel, Supplement to Esther, Prayer of 
 Manasseh. (Grh.) [11] 
 
 In the New Testament we have no apocryphal books in the 
 same sense as in the Old Testament ; but still there are single 
 books of the New Testament in regard to whose origin and 
 authors the evidence is not in all cases equally consentaneous. 
 A certain distinction must therefore be made between them and 
 the others that are equally authenticated by every species of evi- 
 dence ; and yet this distinction, resting as it does merely upon 
 the want of entire agreement in the evidence, whilst very im- 
 
92 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 portant testimony of various kinds is at hand to prove their 
 canonical authority, is not of so much importance as to prevent 
 us from making a canonical use of these books. [12] 
 
 Those books of the New Testament authenticated by all the 
 testimonies are the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, [L3] and 
 John, Acts of the Apostles, Paul's Epistle to the Romans, his 
 two Epistles to the Corinthians, his Epistles to the Galatians, 
 Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, two Epistles to the Thessa- 
 lonians, two to Timothy, the Epistle to Titus, the Epistle to 
 Philemon, the first Epistle of Peter, and the first of John. 
 
 Those in regard to which doubts are entertained by some are 
 the Epistle to the Hebrews, the second Epistle of Peter, the sec- 
 ond and third of John, the Epistle of James, that of Jude, and 
 the Apocalypse of John. 
 
 [1] Grh. (II, 50) : "The biblical books are distinguished into the 
 books of the Old and New Testaments. The books of the Old Testament 
 are those which were written before the appearance of Christ; the books 
 of the New Testament those which were written after the appearance 
 of Christ, and addressed to the Church. Where observe, that the books 
 of the Old Testament are called such, not because they do not mani- 
 festly contain anything of the substance, grace, and felicity of the New 
 Testament promised through Christ to those believing in him, but be- 
 cause they predict and prefigure that as future and to be fulfilled in due 
 time, which in the New Testament is announced as complete. Rom. 
 3: 21; 16: 26." 
 
 Holl. (129), as to the relation between the Old and New Testa 
 ments : "The books of the Old Testament were committed to the Israel- 
 itic Church, those of the New Testament to the Christian Church, 
 collected from all nations. Yet the Christian Church receives the 
 canonical books of the Old Testament on account of the most admirable 
 harmony of the prophetic and apostolic writings, on account of their 
 great utility, and especially in obedience to the command of Christ, 
 John 5: 39. There is a disparity (between the Old and New Testa- 
 ments) as to the degree of perspicuity, but not a diversity as to the 
 object of revelation, as if in the one, things were explicitly taught as 
 necessary to be believed, different from those taught in the other, since 
 faith is the same in both. Eph. 4: 16." 
 
 [2] Chemn. (Ex. Trid. I, 85): "The Canonical Scriptures derive 
 their eminent authority mainly from the fact that they are divinely in- 
 
THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENT. 93 
 
 spired, 2 Tim. 3 : 16 ; i. e., that they came not by the will of man, but 
 the men of God both spake and wrote as they were moved by the Holy 
 Ghost." 
 
 [3] Chemn. (Ex. Trid. I, 81) : " The Scriptures are called canonical, 
 the canonical books, or the canon of Scripture, because they are a rule 
 according to which the edifice of the faith of the Church is to be so 
 constructed and framed as that whatever agrees with this rule is to be 
 regarded as right, sound, and apostolical; and that whatever does not 
 quadrate with it, but varies either by excess or deficiency, is properly to 
 be regarded as supposititious, adulterated, erroneous. This canon or rule 
 is the doctrine divinely communicated from the beginning of the world 
 to the human race through the patriarchs, prophets, Christ, and the 
 apostles. And because this doctrine is by the will of God contained in 
 the Scriptures, they are hence called canonical. A canon is an infalli- 
 ble rule or measure which by no means allows that anything be added 
 to it or taken from it." 
 
 [4] Grh. (II, 53): "The apocryphal books are so called anb rov 
 airoKpvTTTuv, which signifies concealed, either because their origin was 
 not clearly ascertained by those by whose testimony the authority of the 
 true Scriptures has been handed down to us (Augustine) ; or, because 
 they are not read publicly in the churches as a source of proof for ec- 
 clesiastical doctrines, but merely as a means of moral improvement." 
 Holl. (131) : "The apocryphal books are those which are found in the 
 volume of Scripture, but do not belong to the canon, and were not writ- 
 ten by immediate divine inspiration." This definition applies only to 
 those which accompany the canonical Scriptures; another class is formed 
 by those " which contain fables, errors, and lies, and hence are not to 
 be read in the churches." Grh. (II, 55) : "The former kind are called 
 apocryphal in the sense of obscure (absconditi), i. e., uncertain and hid- 
 den as to their origin ; the other class in the sense that they deserve to 
 be kept obscure (abscondendi), and ought not to be read in the churches." 
 Cal. (I, 491) : " The division of the books of Scripture into canonical 
 and apocryphal is improper and equivocal, since only the former meet 
 the definition of the Sacred Scriptures, the latter merely have the name." 
 
 [5] Chemn. (Ex. Trid. I, 93) : "Are then these books to be abso- 
 lutely condemned and rejected ? This we by no means demand. Of 
 what use then is this whole discussion ? We reply, That the rule of 
 faith or sound doctrine in the Church may be certain. The fathers 
 taught that authoritative proof of ecclesiastical doctrine was to be drawn 
 only from the canonical books . . . The authority of canonical Scrip- 
 ture alone was judged competent to decide in disputed questions; but 
 
94 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 the other books, which Cyprian calls ecclesiastical, Jerome apocryphal, 
 they desired indeed to have read in the churches, merely however for 
 the edification of the people, not as proof in matters of doctrine. No 
 dogma is, therefore, to be deduced from these books which has not clear 
 and indubitable support and evidence in the other canonical books. No 
 controverted topic can be decided by these books, if there be not other 
 conclusive evidence in the canonical books. Butf whatever is said in 
 these books is to be expounded and understood according to the analogy 
 of those truths which are plainly taught in the canonical books." 
 
 Cal. (I, 492) : " Two things are necessary to constitute a canonical 
 book ; first, deoTrvevoTia^ or the immediate divine impulse which proves 
 the document in question to be divine truth or the very Word of God ; 
 secondly, the divine sanction (canonicatio divina), by which God con- 
 stitutes his written Word the perpetual and universal rule of the 
 Church." 
 
 Holl. (129) : " The canonical books are those whose doctrines and 
 single words were committed to writing by the prophets and apostles, 
 by the immediate inspiration of the Holy Spirit, and were communi- 
 cated to the Church by God, and received by her as the infallible rule 
 of faith and morals, for man who is to be saved." 
 
 [6] Holl. (126): " We judge of the canonical authority of Scrip- 
 ture with reference to its doctrines, by the same proofs and arguments 
 by which we decide in regard to its divine origin. For the Sacred 
 Scriptures are an infallible rule or canon of faith and morals, because 
 they derive their origin immediately from God, and are designed by 
 him for canonical use. Wherefore, when the above-mentioned criteria 
 convince us that the meaning or doctrine of Scripture has proceeded 
 immediately from God, there is no need of an extended demonstration 
 of their canonical authority, so far as the doctrine of the canon is con- 
 cerned." 
 
 [7] Holl. (126) : "The canonical authority of Scripture, consid- 
 ered as to its doctrines, is proved by external and internal criteria, but 
 especially by the internal testimony of the Holy Spirit illuminating the 
 minds of men, through the Scriptures attentively read or heard from 
 the mouth of a teacher." 
 
 [8] Chemn. (Ex. Trid. I, 85): " That this whole matter, in itself 
 of such vast importance, should be perfectly secure against all imposture, 
 God selected certain men to write, furnished them with many miracles 
 and divine testimonials, that there might be no doubt that those things 
 were divinely inspired which they wrote. Finally, these writings, di- 
 vinely inspired, were at the time when they were written, by common 
 
MARKS OF CANONICITY. 95 
 
 consent, with public indorsement, presented, given, and intrusted to the 
 Church, that she should, by all possible care and forethought, preserve 
 them uncorrupted, transmit them thence from hand to hand, and intrust 
 them to posterity. And as the ancient Church, in the time of Moses, 
 Joshua, and the prophets, so also the primitive Church in the time of 
 the apostles, could give certain testimony as to which writings were di- 
 vinely inspired. For she knew the authors whom God commended to 
 the Church by peculiar evidence ; she knew also what those things were 
 that were written by them, and from what she learned orally from the 
 apostles, could decide that those things which were written were the 
 very same doctrine which the apostles orally delivered . . . The Scrip- 
 tures, therefore, derive canonical authority principally from the Holy 
 Spirit, by whose impulse and inspiration they were written ; secondarily, 
 from the writers themselves, to whom God gave clear and peculiar 
 proofs of their truth ; finally, from the primitive Church, as a witness, 
 in whose day these writings were published and approved. Now this 
 testimony of the primitive Church concerning the divine inspiration of 
 the Scriptures has been handed down in perpetual succession to posterity, 
 and carefully preserved in certain ancient historical records, so that the 
 Church in subsequent ages is the guardian of the testimony of the primi- 
 tive Church concerning the Scriptures. There is, therefore, the great- 
 est difference between the testimony (1) of the primitive Church and in 
 the times of the apostles, that (2) of the Church in the first centuries, 
 which received the testimony of the primitive Church, and (3) that of 
 the present Church concerning the Scriptures ; for if what now is and 
 formerly was the Church, can show the testimony of those who re- 
 ceived and knew the testimony of the early Church concerning the true 
 Scriptures, we give our assent to her as to a witness proving her asser- 
 tions. But she does not possess the power of determining or deciding 
 anything concerning the sacred books of which she cannot adduce clear 
 documentary proof from the testimony of the primitive Church." 
 
 As to the manner in which the primitive Church proceeded in this 
 matter, Chemn. (Ex. Trid. I, 87) thus expresses himself: "This testi- 
 mony of the primitive Church, in the times of the apostles, concerning 
 the genuine writings of the apostles, the immediately succeeding genera- 
 tions constantly and faithfully retained and preserved, so that when 
 many others afterwards were brought forward, claiming to have been 
 written by the apostles, they were tested and rejected as supposititious 
 and adulterated,^?^, for this reason, that it could not be shown and 
 proved by the testimony of the original Church either that they were 
 written by the apostles, or approved by the living apostles, and trans- 
 
96 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 mitted and intrusted by them to the Church in the beginning; secondly, 
 because they proposed strange doctrine not accordant with that which 
 the Church received from the apostles, and was at that time still pre- 
 serving fresh in the memory of all." 
 
 [9] Holl. (126): "But the canonical authority of Scripture, in 
 reference to the original language, or the authentic Hebrew text of the 
 Old and Greek of the New Testament, is indeed distinctly proved by 
 the testimony of the primitive Church, but not by this alone." (127): 
 "We add to the testimony of the primitive Church the testimony of 
 Scripture, its continued preservation for the profitable use of men, and 
 the character of its style.'' 
 
 The intent of this passage and the one quoted in the eighth note is 
 the following : The Kpcr^pia interna et externa (internal and external 
 criteria) may indeed beget in us a human faith, but not a divine ; the 
 latter can be produced only by the testimony of the Holy Spirit. And 
 this must not necessarily be obtained by the use of the original text : a 
 translation will answer quite as well ; for the power of the Holy Spirit 
 lies in the sense and not in the letter of the Word ; wherefore, also, we 
 cannot become divinely assured, in regard to the idiom in which any of 
 the sacred books has been written, by an internal experience ; for infor- 
 mation on this point we are therefore referred to historical evidence ; 
 and the state of the case then appears to be, that the testimony of the 
 Holy Spirit is necessary to assure us of the divinity of the Scriptures, 
 to which must be added historical proofs to satisfy us as to the language 
 in which a sacred book w 7 as written, as to its author, etc. For Br. 
 (112) thus expresses himself: " The internal illuminating power of the 
 Scriptures is associated with the sense in every language, in such a man- 
 ner, that it does not point out precisely the words of the original text 
 as essentially different from other equivalent w T ords of the same or any 
 other language, text, or version." But the other criteria, which prove 
 the inspiration of the doctrine contained in Scripture, either do not at 
 all relate to the material part of the words of Scripture, but only to the 
 formal part or the doctrine ; or, when they do in some degree relate to 
 the words and their connection, and are employed to prove in general 
 that God is the author of the words of Scripture in any idiom, what- 
 ever it may be, they still cannot clearly indicate the precise words and 
 letters in which each book of Scripture was originally committed to 
 writing. There remains, therefore, the testimony of the Church, which 
 does not, indeed, confer canonical or normative dignity upon the books 
 of Scripture in any particular language, nor does it by its own authority 
 induce that reception of the divine faith by which the inspiration of 
 
PROOFS OF CANONICITY. 97 
 
 that idiom is believed ; but notwithstanding this, inasmuch as it histor- 
 ically proves a certain idiom or writing to be the original of the books 
 of Scripture, in which it received them as written by the sacred pen- 
 man, and thus produces a moral certainty in regard to it; thus, joined 
 with that which the Scriptures themselves teach, and with which the 
 Holy Spirit intimately connects his own influence, it now holds a place 
 in the discussion of the faith (in discursu fidei). As an example Holl. 
 (127) adduces the following : "When it is asked, Was the gospel of 
 Matthew originally written in Greek or Hebrew? this is a question not 
 
 of dogmatics, but of history Of this fact the Primitive Church 
 
 is a credible witness, for it fought upon earth under the banner of 
 Christ, together with the writers then living in the flesh, and received 
 their autographs from their own hands. .... Thus we seek from the 
 Jewish Church evidence for the Hebrew original of the Old Testament, 
 and from the primitive Christian Church for the original Greek of the 
 New." 
 
 It is still worthy of remark that it cannot be clearly understood, from 
 the passages quoted from Hollazius and Baier, whether these theolo- 
 gians supposed that, as each individual can attain only by the testimony 
 of the Holy Spirit unto divine faith in the revelation by Christ, so in 
 like manner each individual can be convinced of the divinity of each 
 single booh of Scripture by the testimony of the Holy Spirit. The 
 contrary might seem to be proved by the fact that the most of the 
 theologians speak of the testimony of the Holy Spirit only when they 
 are discussing the grounds upon which the authority of Scripture rests 
 (so Grh.) ; for wiien it is asserted that each individual attains to divine 
 assurance of the authority of Scripture only through the testimony of 
 the Holy Spirit, this is still somewhat different from the assertion that 
 the canonicity of each separate book must be proved in the case of each 
 individual by the testimony of the Holy Spirit. And Chemnitz, 
 further, does not mention, in this connection, this testimony of the 
 Holy Spirit ; but, in order to prove the canonicity of the separate 
 books, points only to the testimony of the earliest Church which could 
 appeal to the indorsement of the Apostles. And, finally, in all the in- 
 vestigations by the Dogmaticians, in regard to the canonicity of a single 
 book, there is never any allusion to the testimony of the Holy Spirit 
 (Luther's well-known expression of opinion, in regard to the Epistle of 
 James, must not here be taken into the account), but they are all con- 
 ducted upon the basis of historical evidence. The true state of the case 
 appears most probably to be, that the question whether the proof of the 
 canonicity of a particular book is to be distinguished from the proof of 
 
98 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 the divine authority of Scripture in general was never clearly brought 
 home to the consciousness of our theologians; so that the passages 
 quoted in this note, and in Note 6, are designed to preclude the error of 
 supposing that the historical testimony of the Church can establish 
 divine faith in the Scriptures in general. 
 
 [10] Many theologians divide the books of the Old Testament into 
 legal, historical, dogmatical, and prophetical. 
 
 Quen. (I, 236) : " All those books, therefore, of the Old Testament, 
 and only those, are canonical, which (1) were written by the prophets 
 and the prophetic spirit, i. e., by immediate Divine inspiration (Luke 
 16 : 29 ; Rom. 1:2; Eph. 2 : 20 ; 2 Pet. 1 : 19, 21) ; (2) and written 
 in the original Hebrew tongue, then vernacular to the Jews, with the 
 exception of a few sections in Daniel, Ezra, Nehemiah, and Jeremiah, 
 that are extant in Chaldee; (3) contain infallible truth, in all points 
 most exactly self-consistent; (4) which were divinely committed to the 
 Jewish Church for perpetual canonical use, received by it, regarded as 
 canonical, preserved and faithfully handed down to the times of Christ; 
 (5) a, approved, cited, and commended by Christ and the Apostles; 
 and b, as a canon or rule of faith and morals, transmitted unto us by 
 the primitive Church." 
 
 [11] Chemn. (Ex. Trid. I, 91) : "The reason why those books have 
 been denied canonical authority is obvious. For some of- them were 
 written after the time of the prophets, when the people of Israel no 
 longer had prophets, such as the ancient ones were; and they were 
 written by those who had not the Divine testimonies, as the prophets 
 had, concerning the truth and authority of their doctrine. Some of 
 these books, indeed, bear the names of prophets, but do not possess cer- 
 tain proofs of having been written, by those to whom they are attributed. 
 This is the manifest reason why they have been removed from the canon 
 of Scripture. " The most extensive investigations in regard to the 
 separate canonical and apocryphal books of the Old and New Testa- 
 ments are to be found in Grh., vol. ii, loc. i., c. vi-xi. 
 
 [12] We find that the earliest Dogmaticians insist more upon the dif- 
 ference between these and the other undoubtedly canonical books than 
 the later ones. The most strenuous of all is Chemn. (Ex. Trid. I, 
 192) : " I have cited the testimony of the ancients, not only that the 
 catalogue of those writings of the New Testament may be known which 
 have not sufficiently sure, strong, and consentaneous proofs of their 
 authority, but more especially that the reasons may be known why there 
 should have been any doubt concerning them. (1) Because the an- 
 cients did not possess sure, strong, and consentaneous evidence concern- 
 
APOCRYPHAL BOOKS. 99 
 
 ing the testimony of the original apostolic Church, that these books 
 were approved by the apostles and recommended to the Church. (2) 
 Because it does not certainly appear, by the testimony of the earliest 
 and ancient Church, whether these books were written by those whose 
 names they bear; but they have been regarded as published by others 
 under the name of apostles. (3) Since some of the ancients ascribe 
 some of these books to the apostles and others advance a different opin- 
 ion. This matter, then, inasmuch as it Avas not indubitably certain, has 
 been left in doubt. This whole controversy depends upon the sure, strong, 
 and consentaneous evidence of the earliest and ancient Church ; for, when 
 this is wanting, the church in after times, without the aid of clear and 
 positive documentary evidence, can no more create a certainty out of an 
 uncertainty than it can make truth out of falsehood." Chemnitz 
 therefore classes the writings of the New Testament, in regard to whose 
 canonical authority some doubts are entertained, with the apocryphal 
 books, and applies to them all, without exception, what was said con- 
 cerning such parts of the Old and New Testaments in Note 5. It is, 
 however, not hereby denied that there may be a certain difference in 
 value between the apocryphal books of the Old and New Testaments, 
 but it is only asserted that these writings are not to be placed in the 
 same category with the canonical books. For, as we see, Chemnitz in- 
 sists upon the principle that only those books are to be regarded as 
 canonical in regard to which we possess the most specific and perfectly 
 consentaneous evidence: (1) that they were recommended to the Church 
 by apostles, and (2) that they really are the production of the authors 
 whose names they bear. But the theologians who immediately suc- 
 ceeded him began appealing to the voice of the Church in past ages to 
 regard these books as canonical, although they did make some distinc- 
 tion in regard to them. Thus the Magdeburg centuriators (Grii. II, 
 184) say: "There were some writings disseminated throughout the 
 Church during this century, in the name of the apostles or their disci- 
 ples, of which some were not generally received, owing to the doubts 
 of some, but were ajterwards received among the number of the Catholic 
 writings, and others which were altogether rejected as apocryphal. Of 
 the former kind are the epistle of James, etc." And Hunnius (in 
 Grh. ib.): "We nevertheless acknowledge that the apocryphal books 
 of the New Testament merited more favor and approbation from the 
 primitive Church than the apocrypha of the Old Testament. Where- 
 fore many of the fathers, who excluded from the canon certain books of 
 the Old Testament, excluded no book of the New Testament, but made them 
 all canonical.^ If we inquire into the reason why this was done, it ap- 
 
100 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 pears to be the following (although we find it nowhere distinctly ex- 
 pressed), that an absolute agreement was no longer demanded, or this 
 circumstance was ignored and reference had merely to the second requi- 
 site, mentioned by Chemnitz; and even this was not regarded as abso- 
 lutely necessary to establish the canonical authority of a book. For 
 Mentzer already (in Grh. II, 185) says : "The books of the NeAv Tes- 
 tament that are called ecclesiastical or apocryphal we receive as de- 
 serving to be regarded as canonical, and as having equal normative 
 authority with the rest. And we add the qualifying term 'almost' for 
 this reason, that in the primitive Church some persons occasionally ob- 
 jected to these books because it could not be certainly known by whom 
 they were written or published." And Schroeder (also in Grh. II, 
 185): "There are certain books of the New Testament called by some 
 apocryphal, but for scarcely any other reason than because it was 
 doubted concerning them, not whether they were written by the inspi- 
 ration of the Holy Spirit, but whether they were published by the 
 apostles to whom they are ascribed. But inasmuch as the doubt con- 
 cerning them did not relate so much to their original Divine author, 
 viz., the Holy Spirit, as to the writers or secondary authors, and as 
 their authority ', in the face of this doubt, was abundantly sustained by the 
 principal and earlier fathers of the Church, they are received generally 
 as of equal authority with the canonical. For, that a book may be re- 
 garded as canonical, it is not necessarily required that the second author 
 or writer be manifest ; it is sufficient if the first author or dictator, viz., 
 the Holy Sprit, be manifest; for the books of Judges, Ruth, and Esther 
 are canonical and yet their writers are unknown." From this time, 
 therefore, these books have been thus regarded by nearly all, as Grh., 
 e. g. (II, 186): "(1) There is, indeed, some difference to be made be- 
 tween the books that are contained in the New Testament. For it can- 
 not be denied that some of them were, at times, objected to by some in 
 the early Church. (2) These books are inappropriately called apocry- 
 phal, as we can show by a threefold argument: (a) Because the doubts 
 concerning them in the primitive Church did not so much relate to 
 their canonical authority as to their secondary author; (6) Because 
 even this doubt was not entertained concerning them by all the churches 
 or teachers, but only by some. Two manifest points of difference are 
 therefore discernible between the apocrypha of the Old Testament and 
 those books which some call the apocrypha of the New Testament. The 
 authority of the former was rejected by the whole Church, but it was 
 only some in the Church who doubted the authority of the latter; (c) 
 The fathers who treated as such the apocrypha of the Old Testa- 
 
ARTICLES OF FAITH. 101 
 
 merit did not exclude any book of the New Testament from the 
 canon. (3) In teaching we may distinguish between the canonical 
 books of the New Testament of the first and second rank. Canon- 
 ical books of the first rank are those concerning whose authors or 
 authority there never was any doubt in the Church, but which by com- 
 mon consent were always regarded as canonical and divine. Canonical 
 books of the second rank are those concerning whose authors there have 
 sometimes been doubts entertained by some persons in the Church." 
 Precisely in the same strain Quen. (I, 235) : "We call those books of 
 the New Testament protocanonical, or of the first rank, concerning 
 whose authority and secondary authors there never was any doubt in 
 the Church ; and those deuterocanonical, or of the second rank, con- 
 cerning whose secondary authors (not their authority, however,) there 
 were at times doubts entertained by some. There was doubt, I say, and 
 discussion concerning these books, yet not among all, merely among a 
 few ; not at all times, only occasionally. And these doubts had not re- 
 ference so much to their divine authority or primary author, the Holy 
 Spirit, as to their secondary authors." And Holl. (131) at last no 
 longer finds this distinction necessary ; " since at the present time all 
 evangelical teachers assign divine authority to these deuterocanonical 
 books, there seems to be no occasion any longer for that distinction." 
 
 The assertion that the authority of these books had never been doubted 
 is contradicted by Br. (120): " It cannot indeed be denied that some of 
 the ancients did so doubt in regard to these writers, as to refuse to them 
 the authority that belongs to inspired books ;" but he also says concern- 
 ing them : li They are not ignored when we are asked for the rule of 
 faith, but they have this authority by common consent at the present day 
 among Christians, especially those of our confession." He does not go 
 into the special proof of this position, it is true, but probably for the 
 reason that he did not regard the doubt raised by so few as of sufficient 
 importance to make this necessary. 
 
 [13] In reference to the gospels of Mark and Luke, Chemn. (Ex- 
 Trid., I, 87) remarks : " That Mark and Luke, who were not apos- 
 tles, were divinely called to write the gospel, Augustine thus explains, 
 lest namely it should be thought that, in reference to the preaching 
 and reception of the gospel, it made any difference whether those pro- 
 claimed it who followed the Lord while here in the flesh as disciples and 
 servants, or those who believed what they clearly learned from these ; 
 and that it was providentially so arranged by the Holy Spirit, that 
 to some of those who followed the apostles authority was given, not 
 only of preaching, but also of writing the gospel," etc. 
 
102 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 Concerning the Articles of Faith and the Symbols of 
 
 the Church. 
 
 § 13. What are Articles of Faith f 
 
 HPHE whole subject-matter of revelation naturally divides 
 -*- itself into single propositions, which we call articles of 
 faith. " An article of faith is a part of the doctrine, revealed in 
 the written Word of God, concerning God and divine things, 
 proposed to the sinner to be believed in order to his salvation." 
 Holl. (48). [1] Taken together these articles form the sum of 
 what the Christian is to believe, [2] and they are closely con- 
 nected together, standing in the same relation to the general 
 contents of revelation as the members of a body to the body 
 itself. The articles of faith have their origin solely in the Holy 
 Scriptures; [3] but, inasmuch as their contents embrace some 
 truths which could not be known in any other way, and others 
 of which some knowledge may be gained by the light of nature; 
 and, inasmuch as all the truths contained in them are not of 
 equal importance for our salvation, and do not stand in equally 
 intimate connection with it, the articles of faith may be divided 
 into, 
 
 I. The pure articles (which are known only by divine revela- 
 tion), and the mixed {which are manifest not merely from revela- 
 tion, but also from the light of nature). Br. (43). [1] 
 
 II. The fundamental and non-fundamental. 
 
 Holl. (46): " The fundamental articles are parts of the Chris- 
 tian doctrine so necessary to be known that, when they are not 
 known, the foundation of the faith is not savingly apprehended 
 or retained by man ; and when they are denied by him, to that 
 same extent it is overturned." [5] 
 
 (53): "The non-fundamental articles are parts of the Christian 
 doctrine which one may be ignorant of or deny, and yet be 
 saved." [6] But the fundamental articles are again divided into 
 
ARTICLES OF FAITH. 103 
 
 u primary ) without the knowledge of which no one can attain 
 unto eternal salvation, or which must be known in order for any 
 one to hold the foundation of the faith and secure salvation ; " 
 [7] and "the secondary, which one may be ignorant of, but dare 
 not deny, much less oppose, without injury to the foundation of 
 the faith." Quen. (I, 243). [8] 
 
 The whole of the articles of faith the Church has collected in 
 the Symbols. These contain the confession of faith which the 
 Church has put forth at different times, and are therefore divided 
 into the symbols of earlier and later times. [9] 
 
 t 
 
 [1] Holl. (43): " The term article is derived from artus, and this 
 from arcto. It properly signifies members of the body closely joined to- 
 gether, as the joints of the fingers closely cohere. Metaphorically, the 
 word article is applied to the parts of the doctrine of faith that are most 
 intimately joined together." Quen. (I, 241): " So that articles of faith 
 are parts of the doctrine of faith, divinely revealed for our salvation, 
 which are most intimately united to each other and to the whole, as the 
 parts or joints of a finger, and into which the whole structure of the 
 Christian religion, as a finger into its joints, may be resolved. And 
 their connection is so intimate that, when one is removed, the rest can- 
 not continue sound and whole." The word is sometimes taken in a 
 wider, and sometimes in a narrower sense. Holl. (44): "Collectively, 
 it signifies a whole head of doctrine ; distributively , any assertion or 
 enunciation which constitutes a part of Christian doctrine. The Chris- 
 tian doctrine is divided into heads or theological loci, and these ao-ain 
 into certain theses. The heads of doctrine are called articles of faith, as 
 well as the theses under the separate heads ; e. g., the theological locus 
 [general topic] concerning Christ is called an article of faith, and the 
 proposition, ' Christ, in the flesh, sitteth at the right hand of God,' is 
 also called an article of faith." Sometimes, merely the mysteries of 
 the faith are meant by the articles of faith. Br. (42): "It is certain 
 that the term, article of faith, is sometimes used in a stricter sense, as 
 accurately denoting the mysteries of faith necessary to be believed in 
 order to salvation, namely, the pure articles, and of these the fundamen- 
 tal alone." 
 
 [2] Quen. (I, 241): "The subjects with which the articles of faith 
 are occupied are T a mora, the credenda, the things to be believed as such. 
 For a distinction must here be made between the historical and the 
 dogmatical, and between the moral doctrines, which teach what is to be 
 
101 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 done or avoided, and the doctrines of faith, which treat of what is to be 
 believed or not believed. For although faith, generally viewed, may 
 have respect to all that is contained in the Word of God, whether it be 
 of an historical or moral or dogmatical character; yet it has neverthe- 
 less a special reference to the doctrines of faith or the things to be be- 
 lieved, as such." 
 
 Grh. (VII, 165) : "Since those things which are propounded in the 
 Scriptures as matters of faith, are not of one kind, but some pertain to 
 the faith directly and per se, and others in certain respects and re- 
 motely, such as historical descriptions of deeds performed by the saints, 
 so not all the matters contained in the Scriptures can be regarded as 
 articles of faith, strictly and accurately speaking, but only those doctrines 
 the knowledge of which is necessary to salvation." . . . And, after an 
 appeal to Thomas Aquinas: "If the Jesuits in the Ratisbon colloquium 
 had observed this principle of the teacher, they never would have 
 blurted forth this assertion : 'It is an article of faith that the dog of 
 Tobias wagged his tail.'" 
 
 If the Dogmaticians found it necessary, over against the Romanists, 
 to guard against too wide a use of the term, articles of faith, they found 
 it equally necessary, at a later day, in opposition to Calixtus, to guard 
 against a too narrow use of the same expression. After the example of 
 Bonaventura, he divided the doctrines into antecedent, constituent, and 
 consequent. In the first class he included everything that man can 
 know by means of his reason, without the aid of revelation; in the 
 second, what in the strict sense constitutes the faith, that stands in 
 special relation to the salvation provided by Christ, and that cannot re- 
 main unknown without peril to salvation. In the third class he included 
 all those doctrines which are derived only by inference from the special 
 doctrines of the faith. The term " articles of faith" he applied only to 
 those of the second class. " The constituent articles of faith are those 
 which, in themselves and their substance, so to speak, and as has been 
 declared, must be known and believed, from the necessity both of means 
 and of the command. . . . The knowledge of the antecedents and con- 
 sequents is not a matter for every one, but only for the more advanced." 
 . . . And thus, in opposition to him, the distinction was made, that 
 everything contained in the Scriptures that refers to the faith is an 
 article of faith. As Calixtus further maintained : "That the Apostles' 
 Creed sufficiently comprehended all the articles of faith, so that the 
 ignorance of other doctrines might be regarded as by no means harmful 
 to salvation;" and : " That the Apostles' Creed was a mark for distin- 
 guishing not only Christians from the heathen, but also the orthodox 
 
ARTICLES OF FAITH. 105 
 
 or Catholics from heretics; so that whoever received the Apostles' 
 Creed should be considered members of the Catholic Church and sub- 
 jects of the kingdom of Christ, and were by no means to be condemned 
 as heretics, whatever errors they might entertain," — he is answered by 
 the statement (Quen. I, 30) : " The Apostles' Creed is not an adequate 
 test of the doctrines that must be believed in order to salvation, as if it 
 were a proof of internal spiritual communion, as if many more things 
 could not be demanded of every Christian as necessary to salvation ;" 
 and Cal. (I, 235) negatively answers the question: ''Whether the 
 Apostles' Creed explicitly, adequately, and specifically contains all 
 things that are to be believed, so that nothing should be regarded as an 
 article of faith that is not therein contained ?" 
 
 [3] Holl. (44) : " A true article of faith must be (a) revealed in 
 the written Word of God ; (b) have reference to the salvation of man ; 
 (c) be intimately connected with the remaining doctrines of the faith ; 
 and (d) be not apparent to unaided reason." Qtjen. (I, 242) : " For, 
 it is possible for doctrines to be perspicuously and plainly propounded 
 in Scripture, while their subjects, peculiar to faith, may not be clearly 
 apprehended, as the mystery of the Trinity, etc., etc., since by the light 
 of nature they would never have been known; whence faith is said to 
 be occupied with such things as are not seen. Heb. 11 : 1." 
 
 In opposition to the assertion of the Socinians: " Whatever is abso- 
 lutely necessary to salvation, must necessarily be with simple and entire 
 literalness written in the Scriptures," we have the statement of Cal. 
 (I, 804) : "Although we acknowledge that those things which must be 
 believed in order to salvation ought to be clearly taught and exhibited 
 in the Sacred Scriptures, yet we do not admit that they are expressed 
 in the Sacred Scriptures precisely Kara to p-qrov, or literally, so that those 
 things which are deduced by easy, ready, and obvious inference from 
 the Sacred Scriptures, are not to be considered as articles of faith and 
 necessary to be believed." 
 
 [4] Quen. (I, 242) : " There are some doctrines in Scripture which 
 are simply mora (matters of faith) j and cannot be at all learned from 
 reason, but are infinitely above it; there are also some things to be be- 
 lieved which, although they are revealed in Scripture and necessary to 
 be known, are nevertheless of such a nature that even reason by the 
 use of her own principles could attain some sort of knowledge of them ; 
 hence arise the pure and mixed articles. The former are derived from 
 the Word of God alone and are simply matters of faith, as the article 
 concerning the Trinity, etc., etc.; the latter, although they may be known 
 in some degree from the light of nature, are nevertheless purely matters 
 8 
 
106 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 of faith, in so far as they are known by divine revelation; e. g., that 
 God is, etc., is known from evident proofs, and is believed on the au- 
 thority of the divine revelation. Yet all such things as may be known 
 to some extent by the light of nature, are not matters of faith so far as 
 they are apprehended by the aid of the light of nature, but in as far as 
 they are apprehended by the aid of divine revelation." In like manner, 
 Holl. (45) : " No article of faith formally considered, so far as it is an 
 article of faith, is mixed ; inasmuch as all articles of faith are dependent 
 on divine revelation, and therefore, with respect to their formal object, 
 are not naturally apprehended." 
 
 Of the pure articles of faith Holl. (45) remarks : " They treat of the 
 mysteries of faith that transcend the comprehension of unaided human 
 reason. Mvarfpiov (mystery) is derived from /nveiv, which signifies to 
 have closed eyes, to compress the mouth, and consequently to be silent. 
 From fii eiv is formed pvleiv, which signifies to imbue any one with honest 
 doctrine. Mvei<r&cu is the same as to be initiated into sacred things. 
 '0 fivarr/g is a man initiated into sacred things, who either silently hears 
 others and learns sacred things, or who is imbued with that knowledge 
 of sacred things, so that he teaches them, and is to be heard with rever- 
 ential silence. To fivarrjptov, in profane authors, signifies every secret 
 matter that dare not be rashly mentioned, but especially the sacred 
 Eleusinian mysteries of Ceres, guarded by the strictest silence. In 
 sacred literature, juvcrr/pta (mysteries) are divine and supernatural mat- 
 ters, unknown to unaided reason, not intuitively perceived, but divinely 
 revealed for the sake of our salvation." 
 
 [5] Quen. (I, 242): " The fundamental articles, or those that cannot 
 be unknown or at least not denied consistently with faith and salvation, 
 are those which are intimately connected with the foundation of the 
 faith. A foundation, generally speaking, is, as N. Hunnius defines it, 
 'that which is the first in any structure, which lies beneath the whole 
 structure, and is not sustained by anything else.' " Thus the founda- 
 tion of the faith is that upon which the faith, and, indeed, the whole of 
 Christianity, as a house that is to be built and upheld, is based. And, 
 inasmuch as a foundation is sometimes the same as a cause, a fundamen- 
 tal article is such a doctrine as serves to produce and establish faith and 
 eternal salvation, or which explains some cause of faith and salvation. 
 Quen., according to the method of Hunnius, distinguishes a threefold 
 foundation. "1. Substantial, the object upon which man rests his con- 
 fidence, from the beneficial effect of which he expects eternal salvation ; 
 or it is the proper object of faith, which is the triune God, to be em- 
 braced by faith in Christ, the Mediator. 2. Organic, the Word of God, 
 
ARTICLES OF FAITH, CONSTITUTIVE AND CONSERVATIVE. 107 
 
 winch is as a seed, out of which Christians are born again ; thus it is 
 also called a foundation, inasmuch as it is a means of generating faith, 
 and a source of doctrine which lies underneath faith, and thus is a foun- 
 dation of faith. 3. Dogmatic, that first part of the heavenly doctrine 
 which is not referable to any other doctrine, but revealed for its own 
 sake, and to which all other doctrines, as if revealed for its sake, are 
 referred, and from w T hich, as a sufficient and immediate cause, faith 
 results. Hence heresy is not any and every error, contrary to the 
 Word of God, but one that undermines or overturns the foundation of 
 the faith." Holl. (46) : " A foundation of the faith is either real, i. e., 
 substantial, or dogmatic, i. e., doctrinal. The substantial foundation of 
 the faith and salvation is Christ, since he is the meritorious cause of 
 obtaining from God forgiveness of sins and eternal life. (In 1 Cor. 3: 
 11, Paul calls Christ the foundation of the building; for the whole 
 Church rests upon Christ. . . . But since the Church is the assembly 
 of all who believe and are to be saved, it may be legitimately concluded 
 that Christ is the foundation of faith and salvation.) The dogmatic 
 foundation of the faith is the collection of doctrines divinely revealed, 
 by which Christ, the substantial foundation of the faith, and the wsources 
 and means of salvation necessarily connected therewith, are set forth. 
 (Eph. 2: 20. By the foundation of the apostles and prophets, 
 Paul means the doctrine taught by them. Moreover, the apostle 
 teaches that Christ is the cornerstone, indicating that the doctrine of 
 the prophets and apostles is in such a sense the foundation, that it rests 
 upon Christ Jesus, as the ultimate cornerstone and foundation.) . . . 
 The substantial and the dogmatic foundation of the faith are not two 
 foundations essentially contradistinguished from each other, nor do they 
 differ as to their subject-matter, but as to our method of conceiving of 
 them, in consequence of their different connotation. For Christ is the 
 foundation, as to the subject-matter; the doctrine concerning Christ is 
 the foundation, as to our knowledge. But the doctrine concerning 
 Christ is nothing else than Christ, known by the intellect, and exhib- 
 ited in a written or preached form, that others may know him." 
 
 [6] Br. (56) : "E. g., concerning the sin and eternal ruin of certain 
 angels, concerning the immortality of the first man before the fall, con- 
 cerning Antichrist, concerning the origin of the soul, whether by crea- 
 tion or traduction." But adds to this: " At the same time, moreover, 
 we are to be careful in regard to this matter, lest by embracing or pro- 
 fessing error we rashly sin against divine revelation and God himself; 
 especially, lest something be maintained, through the persuasion of 
 others, contrary to conscience, whereby the foundation and the truth of 
 
108 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 one or more of the fundamental articles of the faith are overturned. 
 For thus, as by a mortal sin, faith and the Holy Spirit may be and are 
 entirely driven away." 
 
 [7] Quen. (I, 243): "Among these fundamental articles of faith a 
 certain order has been established in regard to the relation which they 
 sustain to each other, and to an intermediate as well as an ultimate 
 end; so that some are called primary and others secondary fundamental 
 articles, some are said to be of the first, others of the second rank." 
 
 The primary articles are subdivided. I. By some into constitutive 
 and conservative articles. Quen. (I, 243) : " Constitutive fundamental 
 articles, according to N. Hunnius, are those which constitute the very 
 foundation of the faith, or are the immediate cause of faith, as ' Qod 
 will have all men to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth." 
 The conservative are those which do not, indeed, immediately cause 
 faith itself, but which are necessarily implied in the immediate cause of 
 faith ; e. </,, that God is true and omnipotent, etc.; where he further ob- 
 serves that, " for any doctrine to constitute a foundation of the faith, it is 
 necessary that it so fully and firmly maintain all the doctrines necessary 
 to the production of faith, that none of them be wanting, nor any other 
 doctrine admitted which may militate, directly or indirectly, against 
 the doctrine in question, or render it in any wise inefficient in producing 
 faith." 2. Others divide them "into (a) antecedent articles of faith, 
 which do not, indeed, cause justifying and saving faith, nor are abso- 
 lutely and immediately necessary to its existence, but which are, never- 
 theless, necessary to the complete and permanent establishment of those 
 doctrines which produce and constitute the faith, which cannot be done 
 when these are not taught or are unknown or denied (the doctrine of 
 the existence of a divine revelation, of the existence of God, his power, 
 etc., etc., of the divinity of the Mediator, the sinfulness of man, the 
 resurrection of the dead, the last judgment) ; (b), into constituent articles 
 of faith, which immediately and most nearly relate to our salvation, and 
 intrinsically constitute and cause faith (the Christian doctrines of the 
 love which God bears to man, of the merit and universal atonement of 
 Christ, and its application to individual cases) ; (c),into consequent arti- 
 cles of faith, which so necessarily follow established faith that, if they 
 be not held, faith itself again is lost (the eternal duration of God,- the 
 executive justice of God, the efficacious sanctification of God, the inter- 
 communication of attributes and operations in the person of Christ, the 
 regal office of Christ, etc., etc.)" Hulseman (in Quen. I, 243). 
 
 [8] Holl. (51) : " The secondary fundamental articles are those, a 
 simple want of acquaintance with which does not prevent our salvation, 
 

 EARLIER AND LATER SYMBOLS. 109 
 
 but the pertinacious denial of, and hostility to, which overturn the 
 foundation of the faith. Such are the parts of the Christian doctrine in 
 regard to the characteristic peculiarities of the Divine Persons, of the 
 intercommunication of attributes in Christ, of original sin, of the decree 
 of election in view of final faith, of the justification of the sinner by 
 faith alone, meritorious good works being excluded." (The latter sen- 
 tence is thus further illustrated (p. 52) : " The justification of the con- 
 verted sinner by faith in Christ, is a constitutive fundamental article of 
 faith. But it may happen that a sinner, acknowledging and hating his 
 sins, may repose entire confidence in Christ as a Mediator, and yet 
 know nothing about the exclusion of good works. Who would condemn 
 him? But he who denies that the sinner is justified alone by faith in 
 Christ, violates the primary fundamental articles concerning the grace 
 of God and the merits of Christ.") The comparison of Notes 7 and 8 
 shows, moreover, that the Dogmaticians do not similarly divide the 
 single doctrines of the same class. From the distinctions made in the 
 fundamental articles there results what Holl. (53) remarks : "All the 
 fundamental articles of faith must necessarily be known, but the grades 
 of this necessity are different. For those articles of faith which not 
 only enter into the very definition of saving faith, but are immediately 
 operative in the production of faith, are the most necessary for man to 
 believe in order to his salvation. Of the remaining articles some are 
 positively and directly, others negatively and indirectly, necessary to be 
 believed. And, in reference to those who believe, the same measure of 
 knowledge will not be required of all." 
 
 The (Jistinction between the articles of faith, as fundamental and 
 principal and less principal, is met with already in Gerhard, who took 
 it from the Scholastics ; but in the fully developed form above cited, it 
 first appears in Nic. Hunnius. Reformed theologians, in order to bring 
 about a union of the two confessions, had denied the existence of a fun- 
 damental difference between them, and for this purpose had generalized 
 the definition of the term fundamental as much as possible. To guard 
 against falsely irenic attempts, Hunnius then wrote his " Careful Ex- 
 amination (SiaoKE-tyL?) of the Fundamental Doctrinal Difference between 
 the Lutherans and Calvinists. Wittenberg, 1626." 
 
 [9] Quen (I, 21): " A summary of true religion (and of the articles 
 of faith) is contained in the Symbols, embracing the Christian faith ; 
 these are either ancient or oecumenical, received throughout all Chris- 
 tendom" (Apostles' Creed., the Nicene, Constantinopolitan, Ephesian, 
 Chalcedonic, and Athanasian creeds), or more recent and, by reason of 
 their less solemn sanction, particular (the unaltered Augsburg Confes- 
 
110 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 sioii, the Apology, the Smalcald Articles, the Catechisms of Luther, and 
 the Formula of Concord). 
 
 In regard to the relation of the earlier to the later symbols, Hutt. 
 remarks (Comp. 7): "Those which were approved by the unanimous 
 consent of the whole Catholic Church, viz., the three oecumenical sym- 
 bols, possess far greater authority than those which have received the 
 sanction and approbation of only a few particular churches." 
 
 As to the meaning of the word Symbol Cal. (I, 101) : " They are 
 
 called symbols because they were the tokens of the ancient Church, by 
 which the orthodox could be distinguished from the heterodox." Holl. 
 (54): "They are public confessions, drawn up after much deliberation 
 and consultation, in the name of the Church, by orthodox men, with 
 reference to certain articles of faith, so that the members of the orthodox 
 Church might be removed from the ignorance and heretical wickedness 
 of infidels, and be preserved in the proper profession of the faith." As 
 there are a number of them, Hutt. (Comp. 6) remarks: " Our churches 
 recognize many symbolical books, but only as the same kind of evidence 
 for the doctrine of their day." 
 
 In reference to the relation sustained by the Symbolical Books to the 
 Scriptures, cf. the Form. Conc. (Of the compendious Rule and Guide, 
 7): "There is thus a very clear distinction made between the Sacred 
 Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments and all other writings ; and 
 the Sacred Scriptures are acknowledged as the only judge, rule, and 
 guide by which, as by a Lydian stone, all doctrines are to be tried and 
 adjudged, whether they be godly or ungodly, true or false. But the 
 other symbols and other writings ... do not possess deceive au- 
 thority, . . . but merely furnish testimony for our religion and explain 
 it, and show in what manner at particular times the Sacred Scriptures 
 were understood and explained, in regard to controverted points, by the 
 learned men who then lived in the Church." This relation was not 
 discussed, however, in the works of the Dogmaticians until the time of 
 Flutter; and the same was the case with the question as to the import- 
 ance and necessity of the Symbols. The relation, as it was regarded at 
 the end of the orthodox period, is thus expressed by Holl. (56) : 
 "The Sacred Scriptures and the Symbolical Books differ; because: (1) 
 The Sacred Scriptures were communicated by immediate inspiration 
 from God to holy men of God, led by the Holy Spirit. The Symboli- 
 cal Books are sacred writings, composed by orthodox men, divinely en- 
 dowed with the privilege of mediate illumination (in a strict sense no 
 symbol of the church can be called inspired). For although these or- 
 thodox men conceived [the symbol] mentally and committed it to 
 
RELATION OF THE SYMBOLS TO THE SCRIPTURES. Ill 
 
 writing, by illumination of the Holy Spirit, yet they did not write by a 
 special, extraordinary, and immediate inspiration of God, but were en- 
 dowed and instructed by God through an ordinary and mediate illumi- 
 nation. Nor were the single words of the Symbolical Books actually 
 dictated to them by the Holy Spirit, but by the assistance and direction 
 of God they themselves discovered suitable words and applied them to 
 the divine doctrines. (2) The Sacred Scriptures are avro-io-og- nal 
 avanddeiKTo-, worthy of belief on their own account, and not needing an 
 earlier source by which they may be proved. The Symbolical Books 
 are eirojuevug- a^idrrcaroc, i. e., they are worthy of belief in consequence of 
 being conformed to the revealed Word of God. (3) The Sacred 
 Scriptures, by virtue of their divine, canonical authority, constitute an 
 infallible rule whereby true doctrines are distinguished from false. The 
 Symbolical Books have ecclesiastical authority, and by virtue of this 
 are called a rule, namely, with regard to the public profession of faith, 
 by which we declare the unanimous consent of the Church in doctrine. 
 
 (4) The Sacred Scriptures adequately contain all that is to be believed 
 and practiced ; no Symbolical Book embraces fully all the doctrines 
 and moral precepts (but, by reason of the time and occasion when and 
 on account of which the Symbolical Books were written, those particu- 
 lar doctrines were discussed which were controverted and chiefly 
 assailed)." And, inasmuch as the Symbolical Books are called inspired 
 by some theologians, Holl. further remarks (58) : " The Symbolical 
 Books are, it is true, called by some authors inspired, (a) by virtue of 
 their object, since they contain and expound the Word of God, formerly 
 communicated by immediate inspiration to the prophets and apostles, 
 and elicit something by legitimate inference from the Word of God ; 
 
 (5) in view of their mediate illumination, for we do not doubt that God 
 exerted a special influence upon the minds of the godly, learned men 
 who wrote the Symbols of the Church, illuminated their minds and in- 
 clined their wills, so that they conceived and wrote most true and whole- 
 some doctrines." 
 
 Of the necessity of the Symbolical Books (Id. 59) : " The Symbolical 
 Books are necessary, not absolutely but hypothetically, for the condition 
 of the Church, which was induced by weighty reasons to their publica- 
 tion, (a) to establish solid, permanent, and firm concord in the Church 
 of God, so that there may be a certain compendious form or type ap- 
 proved by universal consent, in which the common doctrine, which the 
 churches of the purer doctrine profess, collected from the Word of God, 
 may be contained ; (b) to furnish an account of the Christian religion, 
 if it be demanded by the civil authority ; (c) to distinguish the true 
 
112 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 members of the Church from her enemies, the heretics, and schismatics/' 
 In regard to the oath upon the Symbolical Books, Holl. remarks (59) : 
 " He who is a living member of the Church, and designs to fill the office 
 of public teacher in it, may be bound by the superior magistrate to sub- 
 scribe under oath, the Symbolical Books (in order that, as he is publicly 
 to teach in the Church, he may the more be required to adhere to the 
 universally acknowledged profession, exposition, and defence of the 
 common doctrine)." 
 
PART I. 
 
 OF GOD. 
 
 § 14. Division of the Subject. 
 
 HPHE chief design of the creation of man, and that of revela- 
 -*- tion also, is, that God may be known. [1] Theology, there- 
 fore, must begin with the doctrine concerning God. [2] 
 
 The doctrine concerning God may be divided into (1) The 
 doctrine of the existence, the nature, and the attributes of God. 
 (2) The doctrine of the particular manner in which God subsists, 
 i. e., the doctrine of God as triune. (3) The doctrine of the 
 works of God, i. e., of Creation. (4) The doctrine of the man- 
 ner in which God preserves his works and cares for them, i. e., 
 the doctrine of Providence. (5) The doctrine of the angels, as 
 the ministering beings among the works of God. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 Of God. 
 
 § 15. Preliminary Statement. The Natural and Supernatural 
 Knowledge of God. 
 
 r I ^HE full and saving knowledge of God we obtain, of course, 
 -^ only from revelation. But aside from this there exists a 
 knowledge of God, for we find it even among t^e heathen. "We 
 can therefore distinguish a twofold source from which the knowl- 
 edge of God may be derived, the one, the volume of nature, and 
 
 (113) 
 
114 OF GOD. 
 
 the other, the volume of the Scriptures ; and the knowledge of 
 God is accordingly both natural, and revealed or supernatural.^'] 
 The natural knowledge is either innate or acquired, i. e., a cer- 
 tain knowledge of God is inborn, and this can be expanded and 
 further confirmed by the contemplation of the works and ways 
 of God in nature and history. [4] The knowledge thus arising, 
 though in itself true, may nevertheless be corrupted and changed 
 into error through the moral depravity existing in man ; [5] it 
 is at best very imperfect, making known indeed something con- 
 cerning God, e. g n his existence and somewhat of his attributes 
 and will, but this never in its entire extent, and never in such 
 manner as to give to man an absolute certainty, so as to furnish 
 a trustworthy guide for his faith and life ; [6] much less does it 
 suffice to secure his salvation. [7] The reason of this imperfec- 
 tion lies, however, in the depravity of human nature, which, 
 since its fall, can no longer lift itself up to a perfect knowledge 
 of God. All knowledge thus derived we must therefore regard 
 as the remnant of a knowledge which, but for the fall, we would 
 have possessed in full measure ; [8] it serves, accordingly, rather 
 to awaken in us a longing after true and perfect knowledge 
 {cognitio paedagogica), and in some measure to regulate our moral 
 deportment, even before the knowledge communicated by reve- 
 lation has reached us (cognitio pwdeutica) ; and it can also be 
 profitably employed along with revealed knowledge {cognitio 
 didactica). [9] We still need revelation, therefore, in order to 
 acquire full and true knowledge. [10] 
 
 [1] Grh. [Ill, 1) : " That this doctrine concerning God is necessary, 
 is proved (1) by the design for which man was created. Just as all 
 things else were created on account of man, so man was brought into 
 being in order rightly to know and worship, to love and honor God his 
 Creator. . . . (2) By the design for which God reveals himself. God, 
 coming forth from the hidden seat of his majesty, not only in the crea- 
 tion of the world, but also and most of all in the revelation of his Word, 
 out of his boundless goodness unto men reveals himself, surely with no 
 other aim than that men may rightly know God through this revelation, 
 and may preserve and hand down to their posterity the true doctrine 
 concerning God, free from any intermixture of error and in its in- 
 tegrity." 
 
NATURAL KNOWLEDGE OF GOD. 115 
 
 [2] Grh. (ibid.): "As the Holy Scriptures are the only source of 
 knowledge in Theology, so God, boundless in goodness, supreme in 
 power, is the only and absolute source of existence, not only with refer- 
 ence to the Holy Scriptures themselves (in which the Word of God or 
 the divine revelation is contained), but also with reference to the divine 
 works, concerning which Theology treats. The centre of all Scripture, 
 the nucleus of Theology, the end and aim of our knowledge and desire, 
 all these are one and the same. We pass, therefore, in convenient 
 order, from the article concerning the Scriptures to the article concern- 
 ing the Nature of God and the Divine Attributes." 
 
 Quen. (I, 250) : " The chief end of man and of all Theology is God, 
 and the knowledge, worship, and enjoyment of him ; with the doctrine 
 concerning him, therefore, we properly begin, when Theology is treated 
 after the manner of a practical discipline." 
 
 Holl. (187) : "As Theology is a practical science, we are first of all 
 to treat of its design. But as the aim of Theology is twofold, in part 
 objective, that is, the infinitely perfect and supremely beneficent God; 
 and partly formal, that is, the beholding and beatific fruition of God ; 
 so the objective end of Theology, namely, God, who thoroughly satisfies 
 the desire of man, is first to be considered." 
 
 [3] Grh. (I, 93) : " Two things lead to the knowledge of God, the 
 creature and the Scripture (Augustine)." 
 
 Holl. (188) ; " The knowledge of God is sought both by the light 
 of nature or reason, and by the light of revelation." 
 
 [4] Quex. (I, 251) : " The natural knowledge of God is that by 
 which man, without any special revelation, may know of himself, though 
 very imperfectly, by the light of nature and from the book of nature, 
 that there is some supreme Divinity, ana! that he, by his own wisdom 
 and power, controls this w T hole universe, and that he has brought all 
 things into being." 
 
 Grh. (I, 93) : " Innate knowledge is that common conception concern- 
 ing God engraven and impressed upon the mind of every man by nature, 
 and hence from the womb, as though from those sources born with us 
 or noivai- hvoiacg (which are nothing else than certain remains and 
 epel-ia of the divine image, sparks and scintillations of that clear light 
 which shone with full splendor in the mind of man before the fall), 
 which also embrace God; as, that God is one, good, etc." (Ill, 42): 
 "These (scintillations) therefore we refer to that internal book of 
 nature, to which also belongs~tl+e-Jbook avpeidfoeag; the internal testimony 
 of conscience, which the scholastics call avvTrjpci- ; for from principles 
 born within us there arises in the heart of every one this practical 
 
116 OF GOD. 
 
 syllogism: 'He who spends an impious life shall experience the wrath 
 and punishment of a divine judge.' The reason of this lies in that 
 which is by nature engraven upon all, that there is a God, that God is 
 to be worshipped, that God is the avenger of crimes. The conscience 
 of the guilty adds : * I have led a wicked life.' " 
 
 (Id., Ill, 42): " Natural knowledge is acquired by the human mind 
 from the external book of nature, i. e., from the contemplation of the 
 divine effects and ways, by the exercise of its natural powers." As such 
 effects of the divine agency, Grh. enumerates (I, 94) : " (1) The crea- 
 tion of things visible. (2) The variety, beauty, and order of created 
 things. (3) The supporting, governing, and preserving of created 
 things. (4) The profuse bestowment of the various gifts which minis- 
 ter to the necessities of man and other living beings. (5) The notice 
 and retribution of the avenging eye and hand of God. (G) The work- 
 ing of miracles. (7) The foretelling of future events. (8) The peri- 
 odical overthrow of kingdoms. (9) The nature of the human mind. 
 (10) The fragments of natural knowledge, and among these the dis- 
 tinction of good and evil. (H) The terrors, gnawings, and stings of 
 conscience. (12) The series of efficient and final causes." 
 
 Quen. (I, 253): "The natural knowledge of God is twofold; partly 
 E[x<pvrog-, or by nature, impressed upon the minds of men in their very 
 origin, innate and implanted, by which men recognize God through cer- 
 tain principles born within them, as it were by certain fragments and 
 remains of the divine image, without any research or operation of the 
 mind; partly e-kIkt^to^, or acquired, because it is evolved through the in- 
 born principles of nature through a process of reasoning and the accu- 
 rate contemplation of created things, or gathered from the works of God 
 in creation and those traces of divinity which are scattered throughout 
 the universe. The former is called subjective, the latter objective. The 
 former all men, even infants, possess; but the latter is not found in all. 
 The former is propagated by generation; the latter by the instruction of 
 others, or also by personal culture and investigation. The former may 
 be called constitutional knowledge, for it belongs to us after the manner 
 of a constitutional tendency, even before the use and exercise of reason ; 
 the latter, actual, because it exerts itself and is obtained by reasoning 
 and research." Compare also the remark of Grh. (Ill, 46) : " Finally 
 we observe, that when Ostorodus says that men do not obtain whatever 
 knowledge they have of God or of divinity from nature, or from the 
 contemplation of created things, but alone by hearing and from the 
 teaching of others, then that word, hearing, is ambiguous. For if Os- 
 torodus means that for all knowledge of God there is required a special 
 
NATURAL KNOWLEDGE OF GOD. 117 
 
 manifestation of God through the Word, this we totally deny ; but, if by 
 the word, hearing, be understood the doctrine and precepts derived from 
 our ancestors, who followed nature alone as a teacher ; then we say that 
 this, no less than the principles connate with us, and also the contem- 
 plation of created things, belongs to natural knowledge. But, although 
 the arguments are distinct by which we demonstrate as well the innate 
 as the acquired natural knowledge of God ; yet, when the Photinians 
 deny both, it is sufficient for us to prove against them that there is 
 some natural knowledge of God, from whatever source it may arise, 
 either from natural instinct, or from intuition, or from the instruction 
 of others who have followed nature alone as a teacher." 
 
 Cal., in opposition to the Socinians, thus sums up the propositions in 
 regard to the natural knowledge of God: " (1) That man, destitute of 
 the revealed word of God, can attain, by the use of sound reason, to 
 some knowledge concerning God, his being and his general will or 
 providence. (II, 61.) (2) That not only the faculty or the power of 
 knowing God, but also a certain knowledge of God, belongs to us by 
 nature. (II, 73.) (3) Although there does not belong to man a 
 knowledge of God before the use and exercise of reason, so far as con- 
 cerns a distinct notion or mental conception, yet we think it cannot be 
 denied that there exists in man a certain disposition, or a kind of con- 
 stitutional tendency, a certain reXeiuatg- of intellectual power left in man 
 after the fall, by the use of which man can, to some extent, recognize 
 God without the help of a teacher. (II, 80.) (4) That it is known 
 to man, not only naturally, but also per se, that there is a God." 
 (II, 86.) 
 
 The proof for the existence of an innate knowledge is drawn from 
 Rom. 1 : 19, and 2 : 14, 15; also from the following reasons: " (1) 
 From the connate distinction between good and evil that is stamped 
 upon the minds of ail; (2) From the dread of a supreme divinity 
 naturally springing up in the hearts of men; (3) From the terrors of 
 an evil conscience and the cheerfulness and security of a good con- 
 science ; (4) From the torments of conscience on account of a crime 
 committed . . . (5) From the unanimous consent of all nations; (6) 
 From the secret inclination of all to some form of religion ; (7) From 
 moral precepts drawn from the light of nature." (Quen. I, 253.) 
 
 The acquired knowledge is proved from Rom. 1 : 20 ; Acts 17 : 27. 
 
 [5] Quen. (I, 253): "That the natural knowledge of God is true, 
 is evident from this, that the apostle expressly calls it aM/dsta, Rom. 1 : 
 18 seq., and with the addition, atytieiav rbv tfedu, v. 25, as that which 
 springs from original truth ; where, nevertheless, we must distinguish 
 
118 OF GOD. 
 
 between the natural knowledge of God, considered in and through itself, 
 and in so far as it has united with it imperfection, corruption of reason, 
 and a proclivity to various errors. Viewed in the former light it is true, 
 viewed in the latter it is mingled through accident with falsehood." 
 
 [6] Cal. (II, 47): " The imperfection of the natural kdowledge ot 
 God as to those things which are revealed in nature, and its nullity as 
 to the supernatural mysteries of faith." . 
 
 Quen. (I, 253): " The natural knowledge of God is imperfect mainly 
 in two respects : (1) as regards its object, this being either altogether 
 unknown (and here belongs the gospel, which is a mystery hidden from 
 the ages), or not fully known (and here belongs the doctrine of the law, 
 which man knows from natural sources only in part) ; (2) As regards 
 its subject, either not recognizing God with sufficient constancy, or some- 
 times doubting concerning him in consequence of congenital corrup- 
 tion." 
 
 Chmn. Loci, I, 20), thus summarily states it: " To tell the truth, 
 there is either none at all [no natural knowledge of God], or it is imper- 
 fect, or it is weak. None at all, for all philosophy knows nothing of the 
 gratuitous promise of the forgiveness of sins. . . . Imperfect, for the 
 Gentiles knew but a very small part of the law. . . . Weak, for al- 
 though it is impressed upon the minds of men that God exists and de- 
 mands obedience, along with the distinction between good and evil, yet 
 the assent to this is not only feeble but often shaken by horrid doubts." 
 
 In regard to the substance of what is known by the light of nature, 
 Quenstedt thus expresses himself (1, 255): "The controversy here 
 does not turn upon this : Whether man, naturally or without revelation, 
 can recognize to ri ean, what and who is the true God, according to all 
 the peculiarities of the divine nature ; and whether he can naturally 
 fully understand his providence and his special will in the government of 
 the Church and in the eternal salvation of men ? For all these things 
 are to be sought only through the revealed Word. But whether he can 
 naturally know to 6ri, whether there be [any supreme divinity], and in 
 general recognize what that Supreme Divinity is, who is the cause of all 
 things in nature, who is just, good, holy, is to be worshipped, etc.; and 
 so, whether man without a revelation can have any adequate knowledge 
 concerning the true God or any true conceptions concerning God, 
 although in particular he may apply them improperly, as e. g., to that 
 which is not truly God." 
 
 With the last remark from Quenstedt compare the statement of Ger- 
 hard (I, 96): " We must distinguish between the conception of God, 
 derived by the heathen mind from the contemplation of his creatures, 
 
NATURAL KNOWLEDGE OF GOD. 119 
 
 and the application of that conception ; the former is legitimate, the lat- 
 ter is far from being so. For, although they derive the conception of 
 eternal power and divinity . . . from the book f of nature, yet they 
 do not rightly apply it to the one Jehovah, . . . but they ascribe the 
 same to irrational animals, serpents, reptiles, etc.; and inasmuch as they 
 of their own accord devise a method of worship, they thereby worship 
 the imagination of tlieir own heart and not the true God." 
 
 Through the light of nature man attains, therefore, only " a partial 
 knowledge concerning the vTrdp^ig f God, his power, wisdom, goodness and 
 providence." Gbh. (Ill, 60):" Man has been deprived of the knowl- 
 edge of God, so far as the integrity of natural knowledge is concerned, for 
 the greater part of it has been obliterated from his mind by sin ; so far as 
 its purity is concerned, for the knowledge yet remaining is very much 
 olscured ; and, in view also of the pecidiar wickedness of certain persons." 
 
 [7] Quen. (I, 261): " The natural knowledge of God is not sufficient 
 to secure salvation, or even to prevent condemnation, nor has any mor- 
 tal ever been redeemed, nor can any one ever be redeemed by it alone. 
 Acts 4: 12; Eom. 10 : 18 ; Mark 16: 16; Gal. 3:11; Eph. 4:18; Gal. 
 4:8; Eph. 2: 12." 
 
 Mel. (I, 9) : " Although, in whatever way the human mind comes 
 to the knowledge of the fact that God punishes the guilty, nevertheless 
 concerning reconciliation it knows nothing without the revelation of the 
 divine promise." 
 
 [8] Quex. (I, 254): " We must distinguish between the natural 
 knowledge of God, viewed in its original integrity, and the same in its 
 fragmentary remains ; the former is a perfect dsoyvoGla, constituting a 
 part of the mental condition of our first parents, as graciously created ; 
 the latter, on the other hand, is a partial and imperfect knowledge of 
 God, still inherent in our corrupt nature since the fall. It is as it were 
 a little spark of primeval light, a diminutive drop from a vast ocean, or 
 an atom of the ashes of a splendid house in ruins." 
 
 [9] Chmn. (Loci, Parti, 21): "The reasons why God imparted 
 
 that external knowledge of himself to the minds of all men are : (1) 
 
 For the sake of external discipline, which God wished to be exercised 
 
 by all men, even the unregenerate ; (2) that God might be sought after; 
 
 . . . (3) that he might render men inexcusable." 
 
 Cal. (II, 40): "The use of the natural knowledge of God is (1) 
 Pcedagogical, for seeking after the true God, who has manifested him- 
 self through the Scriptures in the Church; (2) Pcedeutical, for directing 
 morals and external discipline both Avithin and without the Church ; 
 (3) Didactic, because it contributes to the exposition and illustration of 
 
120 NATURE OF GOD. 
 
 the Scriptures, if it be rightly employed." (Also II, 51): "The use 
 of this doctrine (i. e., the topic concerning the natural knowledge of 
 God) is that we may understand whether we can by nature know any- 
 thing of God, or what and how' much we can thus know ; lest we either 
 deny those things which are naturally manifest, or ascribe too much 
 importance to them ; also, that we gratefully recognize this manifesta- 
 tion and cultivate this natural knowledge as the book of nature is daily 
 unfolded, and do not suppress it, or abuse it, but duly unite the book of, 
 nature with the book of Scripture, and finally be confirmed and stimu- 
 lated by the teaching and example of those w 7 ho have applied themselves 
 to the study of truth and virtue' as here exhibited and illustrated." 
 
 [10] Quen. (I, 268): "The supernatural or revealed knowledge of 
 God is that saving knowledge of the triune God and of divine things, 
 drawn from the written word of God, which flourished from the begin- 
 ning of the Church and was ordained for human salvation." 
 
 Chmn. (Loci Th., I, 22) : " The saving knowledge of God through 
 which we obtain eternal life, is that revealed through the Word, in 
 which God makes known himself and his will. To this revelation God 
 has bound his Church, which knows, worships, and glorifies God only 
 as he has revealed himself in this Word, so that in this way the true 
 and only Church of God may be distinguished from all Gentile religions." 
 
 § 16. (1.) The Certainty of the Divine Existence. 
 
 Although the divine existence is postulated in the natural 
 human consciousness, and this furnishes many proofs of it, [1] yet 
 we become perfectly certain of it only through revelation. [2] 
 
 § 17. (2.) The Essence of God. 
 
 Our knowledge of the essence of God (quid sit Deus) is also 
 mainly derived from revelation, for the Holy Scriptures give us 
 in the names, attributes, and works of God a description of him- 
 self. [3] And with the knowledge thus 'derived we must be sat- 
 isfied, for we know concerning the essence of God nothing more, 
 and nothing more specific, than what the Holy Scriptures teach. 
 We acquire, indeed, from this source no adequate and complete 
 knowledge of the essence of God ; for this transcends our powers 
 of comprehension, and for this reason the Scriptures declare the 
 incomprehensibility of the divine essence. (1 Tim. 6: 16; 1 
 John 3:2; Eom. 11: 33.) But we may very well be content 
 
NAMES OF GOD. 121 
 
 with the knowledge imparted to us through the Holy Scriptures, 
 as we nevertheless learn therefrom as much about God and his 
 essence as is needful for our salvation. [4] 
 
 From what has been said it is manifest in what sense God may 
 be defined. He cannot be literally defined, *. e., we cannot ex- 
 press in words what God is as to his essence, what he is in him- 
 self, because no adequate conception can be formed of him ; but 
 a definition of God, in a wider sense, may nevertheless be given, 
 in so far, namely, as, upon the authority of the Holy Scriptures, 
 a description of God may be given, according to which we can 
 most clearly distinguish between him and other essences. [5] 
 
 Upon the authority of the description of God given in the 
 Holy Scriptures, we can thus define him as an Infinite Spiritual 
 Essence. [6] 
 
 [1] Grh. (Ill, 43) adduces as such proofs: " (1) The methodical 
 arrangement of animated nature. (2) The succession of efficient causes. 
 (3) The grades and connections of existing things. (4) The specific 
 working towards an end. (5) The natural inclination." 
 
 [2J Grh. (Ill, 40) : " To some it may seem that this question in 
 the Church is superfluous, since it is known and conceded by all that 
 God exists, and there is no people, however barbarous, that denies that 
 God exists, and that he is to be worshipped (though it may not know- 
 how to worship him), and so the knowledge of God is naturally innate 
 in all . . . But nevertheless we must establish to on, f. e., we must 
 prove that God exists, (1) for the confutation of those who deny that 
 there is a God; (2) for the confirmation of our faith ( ... in great 
 and severe temptations, says Chemnitz, we are all either Epicureans or 
 Stoics; our mind must therefore be established by the consideration of 
 the arguments which prove that there is a God, and that he exercises 
 a providential care over human affairs) ; (3) for the perfecting of natu- 
 ral knowledge ( . . . since the natural knowledge of God is imperfect 
 and languid, and so must be confirmed, widened, and deepened from 
 the Word divinely revealed.") 
 
 [3] Cal. (II, 110) : " That God exists, special scriptural statements 
 testify, especially those which communicate his names, words, and 
 works." 
 
 Grh. (Ill, 14) ; " To synonymies belong the names of God, in the 
 exposition of which the principal part of the doctrine concerning God 
 consists, because our theology in this life is almost wholly grammatical, 
 9 
 
122 NATURE OF GOD. 
 
 whence whatever we may know concerning God is called a name of 
 God. . . . The names of God are general or special. In a general 
 and wide sense a name of God is whatever is predicated of God ; thus 
 the term was employed by the ancients, who, under the designation of 
 names, embraced also the attributes or characteristics. " 
 
 Quen. (I, 268) : "In determining the question what God is, we 
 must first consider the divine names, some of which, either in view of 
 their etymology or from the manner in which they are used in Scrip- 
 ture, indicate the essence of God, and are commonly called essential, as 
 Jehovah, Jah, Elohim; others are derived from the divine attributes, 
 as when God. is called omnipotent, just, wise; others from the divine 
 works, as when he is called Creator, Preserver, etc. 2 ' 
 
 [4] Chmn. (Loci Th., I, 24): "As we are not to think of God 
 otherwise than as he has revealed himself in the Word he has given, 
 these questions (concerning the essence and the will of God) have cer- 
 tain prescribed limits, within which the human mind, contemplating 
 God, must confine itself. For dangerous errors have arisen on this 
 subject, for no other reason than because the point of view was not 
 rightly taken, or because human curiosity in this discussion wandered 
 farther than was meet." . . . 
 
 Seln. (I, 53): "It has been said that we ought to be content with 
 the descriptions of God which are given by God himself." 
 
 Id. (I, 51) : " Hilary says: We understand that alone is to be heart- 
 ily believed concerning God, in reference to which he himself authori- 
 tatively testifies that it is to be believed concerning him. What there- 
 fore, God is absolutely, and what is his nature and substance, we know 
 that no one can state, imagine, comprehend, or declare by an essential 
 definition, either by any dialectic reasoning or by the keenness of the 
 human intellect. For, since neither eye has seen, nor ear heard, nor 
 have entered into the heart of man the things which God has prepared 
 for those that love him, how much less can the dulness of the human 
 mind grasp God himself? Whence many are accustomed to say, that 
 it is easier to define what God is not, than what he is." 
 
 Thus Grh. says (III, 15) of the divine majesty: "The variety of 
 divine names expresses the divine majesty. For since, in consequence 
 of its infinite [ perfection, the divine majesty cannot be fully recognized 
 by us, therefore so many divine names are given in the Scriptures, that 
 from these we may be led to something like a suitable recognition of the 
 divine majesty." 
 
 Br. (173) : " It must be confessed that in this life we may not have a 
 specific, proper, and adequate conception, well-defined and clear, of the 
 divine essence ; for we know but in part." 
 
GOD CANNOT BE DEFINED. . 123 
 
 [5] Thus already Chmn. asks (Loc. Th., I, 25) after the example of 
 the Scholastics : " If a definition must explain the nature of the thing 
 defined so as to lead the mind as it were into the very thing itself, how 
 then can God be defined ?" — and answers ; " The reply is easy : It is 
 indeed true, concerning our knowledge of God in this life (1 Cor. 13 : 
 12), that ' we see through a glass, darkly,' and so in the definition it is 
 said, ' He is of immeasurable wisdom and power,' i. e., God is greater 
 than we can imagine or declare. . . . But, in examining- the definition 
 we do not scrutinize those mysteries of the essence and will of God 
 which he wishes us to be ignorant of; but we gather a brief statement 
 from what God has himself revealed to us in his Word concerning his 
 essence and will. And, since God surely wishes to be recognized and 
 worshipped as he has revealed himself, that description of God is to be 
 held, to which the mind reverts in prayer. . . . There is, therefore, a 
 name of God occult and hidden, which is not to be searched out. There 
 is, however, also a name of God made known that he wishes to be rec- 
 ognized, spoken about, praised, and worshipped." 
 
 Grh. (Ill, 70) therefore distinguishes between : " (1) A perfect 
 definition, which exactly conforms to the accuracy (anpi(3eia) of logical 
 rules and any description whatever that is drawn from the Scriptures. 
 (2) Knowledge and comprehension (yvoxjtg nal KardX^iptg). That is com- 
 prehended which is perfectly known ; that is perfectly known which is 
 known so far as it can be known. We know God, indeed, but w T e do 
 not comprehend him, i. e., we do not perfectly know him, because he is 
 infinite. Here we must note, however, that the knowledge qf God de- 
 rived from the Word is called perfect, as well by reason of its end, for it 
 is sufficient for salvation, as by w T ay of comparison with natural knowl- 
 edge, which is very obscure and imperfect. (3) The knowledge of God 
 in this and in another life. . . . The intuitive definition is the most per- 
 fect of all, for we shall then see God in the future life face to face. 
 ... A nominal (bvofiaTadqg) definition may be given, but an essential 
 one (bvaudrjo) not at all." 
 
 Cal. (II, 142) distinguishes in the same way between a definition 
 rigorously taken and a definition broadly applied. 
 
 Grh. (Ill, 68) proves the inadmissibility of a definition in the strict 
 sense: "(1) From the want of a genus. That of which there is no 
 true and proper logical genus cannot be defined, because the genus is an 
 essential part of a definition. But God has no true and proper logical 
 genus ; because, if there were such a genus, that w r ould be in the same 
 terms essentially and equally predicated of God and of creatures, which 
 cannot be done, because God as the Creator and the creature are separ- 
 
124 NATURE OF GOD. 
 
 ated from each other by an infinite interval, and there is nothing that 
 can be equally predicated of both. (2) From the divine perfection. 
 God is the supreme Being, so he has nothing beyond him ; but what- 
 ever is properly denned that is denned through something going before. 
 . . . (o) From a sufficient enumeration. If God may be properly 
 defined, that would be either an essential or a causal definition. Essen- 
 tial it could not be, because that consists in genus and specific differ- 
 entia. But God has no name of the same genus with other beings, nor 
 is his most simple essence composed of genus and differentia. Neither 
 can it be a causal definition, since God is the cause of all things, but of 
 God there is no cause." 
 
 [6] So some, as Calovius, Quenstedt, Koenig ; while others, as Baier 
 (173), Hollazius (229), thus define: "God is a spiritual Being, subsist- 
 ing of himself; or, more concisely: God is an independent Spirit." 
 The individual terms are explained as follows : 
 
 (1) Br. (172) : " By the term divine essence is meant that which is 
 first thought of in God, and through which God is adequately distin- 
 guished from all other things, and which in our mode of conception is 
 the root and source of all the perfections which, as attributes, are 
 ascribed to God." 
 
 (2) Quen. (I, 284) : " The term spiritual essence is a common con- 
 ception. For the term essence is common to God and creatures, but 
 belongs to God originally and independently, to creatures secondarily 
 and by way of dependence. And the term spirit also is analogically 
 predicated of God and angels and also of the souls of men." (The 
 difference that is observed when these two terms are predicated of God 
 and of creatures respectively, is still more accurately indicated in the 
 statement: "Essence, substance, spirit, and consequently the remaining 
 attributes which are ascribed at the same time to God and to creatures, 
 are predicated of God and of rational creatures not ovvovvftug, univocally, 
 nor ofiovv/iug-, equivocally, but avaMyug, analogically, so that they belong 
 to God Tzpurug and absolutely, to creatures Sevrepuc and by way of de- 
 pendence, which analogy is properly employed with reference to an in- 
 trinsic attribute. The term univocal, properly and strictly speaking, 
 belongs to such things as have the name and the thing denoted by that 
 name equally in common, no inequality interfering on account of the 
 dependence of the one upon the other ; equivocal, to such as have a com- 
 mon name but not the thing signified by the name : analogical, to such 
 as have both the name and the thing designated by that name, but un- 
 equally, when the name and the thing belong to the one irpurus and ab- 
 solutely, but to the other devripug and by way of dependence.") (Id. 
 293.) 
 
ATTRIBUTES OF GOD. 125 
 
 (3) " But the predicate infinite expresses the peculiar conception ; 
 for by this God, as an infinite Spirit, is distinguished from angels and 
 the souls of men, or finite spirits, and by this infinity of his own, God 
 transcends all the bounds of being, so that he cannot be limited by time 
 or place or any other thing, but, considered simply in his own nature 
 and essence, he is of himself and absolutely infinite. Nor do we speak 
 of God as compounded, when we form both a common and a peculiar 
 conception concerning him. For that is a distinction of the reason 
 only, and not a real one. (God is infinite, not by virtue of quantitative 
 extension, since he is devoid of all quantity, but by virtue of essence 
 and perfection.)" 
 
 The independence is thus explained by Br. (173) : "For, as by this, 
 God is adequately distinguished from all other things, so there is nothing 
 that you can earlier conceive of in God, as a peculiar and specific con- 
 ception, than this, that he is not from another, and so exists of himself 
 and necessarily. Proof-texts : Isaiah 44 : 6, compared with Isaiah 41 : 
 4; Rev. 1: 17." 
 
 The more popular definition of God (definitio Dei nominalis) is: "By 
 the term God is understood the first Being, because he is of himself and 
 is the cause of all other things, and because he preserves and governs 
 all things;" concerning which Holl. remarks (187): "All men in 
 the present life discover in themselves that they do not and cannot 
 otherwise conceive of God than as related to created things, as the first 
 Being, because from him is the cause of all other beings, and he pre- 
 serves and governs all ; or as the Being % most excellent of all, than whom 
 nothing can be, or be thought of as, better or more perfect." 
 
 The earliest theologians, who did not as yet treat of the attributes as 
 a special topic, embrace them all, together with a notice of the Trinity, 
 in the definition of God. Thus Mel. (Loci Theol. I, 13) : " God is a 
 spiritual essence, intelligent, eternal, true, good, pure, just, merciful, 
 most free, of vast power and wisdom, the eternal Father who begat the 
 Son, his own image, from eternity, and the Son, the coeternal image of 
 the Father, and the Holy Spirit, proceeding from the Father and the 
 Son." Later theologians also regard it as necessary to incorporate at 
 once the Trinity in the definition of God. Thus Cal. says (II, 282): 
 " Those who do not include a statement of the three persons in the de- 
 scription of God do not render it at all genuine or complete, since 
 without these it does not yet appear what the true God is." Compare, 
 per contra, § 19, preliminary note. 
 
126 ATTRIBUTES OF GOD. 
 
 § 18. (3.) The Attributes of God. 
 
 The doctrine of the attributes of God comprises only the more 
 specific description of the divine nature, as the same is set forth 
 in the Holy Scriptures. [1] The attributes are, therefore, not to 
 be considered as something supplementary to the essence of God, 
 which may be laid aside without detriment to the substance of 
 Grod; [2] but in them we describe the divine essence only accord- 
 ing to its special features, because we cannot otherwise conceive 
 of it (they are thus variously characterized on account of the 
 feebleness of our conception) ; hence it also follows that the at- 
 tributes are to be regarded as unchangeable and permanent. [3] 
 
 We acquire our knowledge of the divine attributes, in general, 
 only from the Holy Scriptures, as has been already said, and yet 
 these are here taught, either only by way of popular representa- 
 tion, or without any design of aiding us in constructing a systematic 
 doctrinal statement of the divine attributes. To accomplish this 
 we must have recourse to other expedients. A correct and ex- 
 haustive arrangement of the divine attributes we may, however, 
 attain, if, starting out with the proposition that God is the most 
 perfect Essence, we endeavor to enumerate all his perfections; in- 
 asmuch as the attributes of God are nothing else than the de- 
 scription of this most perfect Essence. These perfections we as- 
 certain in a threefold way : 
 
 1. By ascribing to God, in the highest sense, all the perfections 
 which we can discover in his creatures, inasmuch as no perfection 
 can be wanting to God of which we find creatures possessed. 
 
 2. By removing from our conception of God all imperfections 
 which we observe in creatures, as nothing in any wise imperfect 
 can be ascribed to him, and by attributing to him all the op- 
 posite perfections. 
 
 3. By ascribing to him all the perfections which necessarily 
 must have belonged to one who was able to create and accom- 
 plish what God has done! It is, therefore, by the way of emi- 
 nence, [4] of negation, [5] and causality, [6] that we arrive at a 
 comprehensive knowledge of the divine attributes. 
 
 The attributes found in this way may be variously classified ; 
 usually they are divided either into negative and positive (" the 
 former being those by which the imperfections found in creatures 
 
POSITIVE DIVINE ATTRIBUTES. 127 
 
 are removed from God ; the latter, those by which perfections 
 are simply affirmed concerning God." Thus Holl. (237), or, into 
 such as describe God as he is in himself, and such as describe him 
 in his relation to the world. Therefore, a. Attributes avsvepy^ra, 
 quiescent (which, viz., have no specific reference to certain acts), 
 or immanent, which describe the divine essence absolutely and in 
 itself, without reference to an operation, and so directed towards 
 no act; b. Attributes evepyr/Tina, or operative, and exerting them- 
 selves outwardly, having reference to other things, which describe 
 the divine essence relatively, with reference to an operation, and 
 so are recognized as ordained for certain acts. [7] We follow 
 the former division, and arrange the attributes of God, therefore, 
 in the following manner : 
 
 Br. (174): I, The Negative are: unity, simplicity, immuta- 
 bility, infinity, immensity, eternity. 
 
 1. "Unity ; the attribute of God, by which we conceive the di- 
 vine essence to be absolutely single, not only undivided, but also 
 indivisible and incommunicable by any multiplication of him- 
 self." Holl. (238.) "Unity is ascribed to God, as well absolutely) 
 i. e., that the divine essence is undivided ; as exclusively, i. e., 
 when we recognize God as one, beside whom there is none other. 
 Deut. 6 : 4 ; 4 : 35 ; 2 Kings 19 : 19." Br. (175). [8] 
 
 2. " Absolute Simplicity, by which God is truly and really un- 
 compounded (not compounded of matter and form, of integral 
 parts, of subject and accident, of nature and subsistence). Ex. 3 : 
 14." (Ibid.) [" Spirituality, John 4: 24, is comprised in Simpli- 
 city." Quest. I, 286.] 
 
 3. " Immutability consists in this, that God is liable to no 
 change, either as to existence (inasmuch as God is immortal and 
 incorruptible. Rom. 1: 23; 1 Tim. 1: 17, 6: 16), or as to acci- 
 dents (James 1: 17), or as to place (Jer. 23: 24), or as to will or 
 purpose (Numb. 23: 19; Prov. 19: 21; Mai. 3 : 6)." Br. (176). 
 [9] 
 
 "Immutability is the perpetual identity of the divine essence 
 and all its perfections, with the absolute negation of all motion, 
 either physical or ethical." Quen. (I, 288). 
 
 4. "Infinity, because the essence of God is contained within no 
 bounds (either of time, or place, or of anything else). Ps. 145: 
 3." Br. (177). 
 
128 ATTRIBUTES OF GOD. 
 
 5. " The Immensity of God consists in this, that the divine es- 
 sence cannot be measured by, or included within, any local limits. 
 Jer. 23: 24; 1 Kings 8: 27." Br. (178). 
 
 "Immensity is the interminable ubiety, by virtue of which God 
 cannot but be everywhere, in his own essence, or it is the abso- 
 lute interminability of the divine essence. It flows from infinity, 
 which, with respect to time, is eternity, and, with respect to space, 
 is immensity." Quen. (I, 288). From this there follow : a, the 
 power of being illocally present, absolutely everywhere ; b, the 
 (ubiety and) omnipresence, by virtue of which God is actually 
 present to all his creatures." [10] 
 
 6. The Eternity of God, absolutely so called (for it does not 
 signify merely a very long time), indicates that the existence or 
 duration of God is permanent, without any beginning or end, 
 without succession or change. Ps. 102 : 27; 90: 2; Gen. 21: 33; 
 Isaiah 40: 28; 1 Tim. 1: 17; Rev. 1:4 and 8, 11: 17; 16: 5." 
 Br. (185). 
 
 II. The Positive Attributes. Br. (174) : " Life, knowledge, 
 wisdom, holiness, justice, truth, power, goodness, perfection." 
 
 1. Life. Quen. (1,289): " The attribute, by which the divine 
 essence always shows itself active." [11] 
 
 2. Knowledge. Quen. (I, 289): "By which he, through one 
 simple and eternal act of the intellect, knows all things whatever 
 that have been, are, and shall be, or even in any way can be. 
 Nor only absolutely, but also that which is conditionally future 
 or possible. 1 Sam. 2: 3; 1 John 3: 20; 1 Kings 8 : 39 ; Ps. 7: 
 9; 34: 15; 139: 1; Pr. 15: 3." [12] 
 
 3. " The Wisdom of God signifies that most accurate judgment 
 of God, by which lie knows how to dispose and ordain all causes 
 and effects in a most admirable manner for the attainment of his 
 end. Job 12 : 13 ; 28 : 20 ; Rom. 11 : 33." Br. (191). [13]. 
 
 "The Omnisapience of God is that, by which he most thor- 
 oughly penetrates all those things which infinitely surpass the 
 reach of human and angelic judgment." Quen. (I, 290). 
 
 4. "Sanctity, by which he, conformably to his own law, desires 
 all things that are right and good. Deut. 32: 4; Ps. 92: 15; 
 Lev. 11 : 44; 1 Pet. 1: 15." Br. (200). [14] 
 
 "The holiness of God is the supreme purity in God, absolutely 
 
DIVINE ATTRIBUTES NOT ACCIDENTS. 129 
 
 free from all stain or vice, and requiring due cleanliness and 
 purity in creatures." Quen. (I, 292). 
 
 5. Justice. " The supreme and immutable rectitude of the 
 divine will, demanding from rational creatures that which is 
 right and just." Quen. (I, 292). 
 
 "Justice is a divine attribute ^epyrj-iKbv, "by virtue of which God 
 wishes and does all those things which are conformed to his eternal 
 law (Ps. 92 : 15), prescribes suitable laws to creatures (Ps. 19 : 7), 
 fulfils promises made to men (Is. 45 : 23), rewards the good (Rom. 
 2:5-7; 2 Thess. 1 : 6, 7), and punishes the wicked (Ps. 119 : 137 ; 
 Eom. 1:32; Acts 17: 31; 2 Thess. 1: 6; Rom. 3: 8, 25)." 
 Holl. (268). 
 
 6. " Veracity, by which God is unfailing in speaking the truth 
 and keeping his promises. Numb. 23 : 19 ; Heb. 6 : 18 ; Deut- 
 32:4." Br. (202). 
 
 7. Power. " The divine attribute by which God can accom- 
 plish everything that can possibly be done without implying an 
 imperfection in God." Holl. (272). 
 
 ' : Power is that by which God independently, through the eter- 
 nal activity of his own essence, can do absolutely everything that 
 does not involve a contradiction. Matt. 19 : 26 ; Luke 1:37; 
 18 : 27 ; Eph. 3 : 20." Qcten. (I, 293). [15] 
 
 8 and 9. "Goodness belongs to God not only absolutely and in 
 itself, which is his very perfection, or the essence of God, since he 
 contains within himself all perfections (Matt. 5 : 48 ; Luke 18 : 
 19), either formally or by way of eminence ; but also, respectively 
 or in relation to creatures, to whom God is good, since he effi- 
 ciently produces every created good (Acts 17 : 25, 28 ; James 1 : 
 17 ; 1 Cor. 4 : 7), and this according to his own perfection, as the 
 ideal or pattern of created perfection ; and it attracts also, and 
 excites to the love and desire of himself as the chief good." Br. 
 (205). [10] 
 
 [1] Quex. (I, 284): "Attributes are nothing else than inadequate 
 conceptions of the divine essence, involving in part the essence itself of 
 the object, and inwardly designating the same. Inasmuch as our finite 
 intellect cannot adequately conceive of the infinite and most simple 
 essence of God by a single adequate conception, therefore it apprehends 
 the same by distinct and inadequate conceptions, inadequately represent- 
 
130 ATTRIBUTES OF GOD. 
 
 ing the divine essences which inadequate conceptions are called the affec- 
 tions and attributes of God ; affections, because they treat of and desig- 
 nate the divine essence; attributes, because they are attributed to the 
 same by our intellect." 
 
 Holl. (234): " The attributes of God are called perfections, because 
 they most perfectly declare God's essence." 
 
 [2] Chmn. (Loc. Th. I, 29): " An accident does not belong to God. 
 . . . By an accident that is meant, which can either be lost, or can be 
 added to a substance before existing, or can depart while the substance 
 itself remains." 
 
 Cal. (II, 221): "The attributes are by no means accidental, but, on 
 the part of the object, they are the essence of God itself, regarded under 
 various modes or respects of consideration, since essentials are usually 
 referred to by that name. For if they were accidents, they would add 
 a new entity or perfection, and the essence of God would not of itself be 
 complete. If they would belong to God in the manner of accidents, 
 God's essence would not be altogether immutable, because liable to 
 accidents." 
 
 Quen. (I, 296): "Before any operation of our intellect, divine attri- 
 butes are truly and properly in God, yet they are not accidents, nor are 
 they predicated of God in the manner of inherence or composition." 
 And this is further explained by the following : (I, 297): " The divine 
 attributes do not denote anything superadded to the divine essence, but 
 are only inadequate conceptions of an infinitely perfect essence. The 
 divine essence is like a boundless ocean of all infinite perfections, which 
 the human intellect has not the ability to exhaust, by one single concep- 
 tion, and, therefore, by means of various conceptions, draws drop by drop, 
 as it were, something from that infinity." (Ibid.) " The divine attributes 
 imply the divine essence itself, which we apprehend now with this and 
 then with another perfection, as if we would distribute the essence itself 
 into a number of conceptions, representing the same essence inadequately, 
 inasmuch as our finite intellect cannot at the same time distinctly recog- 
 nize its infinite perfections." 
 
 Hence follows the proposition (Grh. Ill, 84): "The divine attri- 
 butes, considered in and of themselves, are really and absolutely one with 
 the divine essence." Cal. (II, 222): "If they would really differ from 
 the essence after the manner of accidents, a composition in God would 
 be predicated ; and since, by nature, accidents come after essence, for- 
 mer and latter in the order of nature would have a place in God, both of 
 which are amara [contrary to the faith]. If they were to be actually 
 distinguished, they would not be predicated in the abstract of God, who 
 
LEARNED BY WAY OF EMINENCE. 131 
 
 in the abstract is said to be truth, life, love. If God's power were to 
 differ from his essence, God would not be avrei-ovococ ; he would not be 
 powerful of himself, but on account of the power superadded to his 
 essence." 
 
 There is, indeed, a certain difference between essence and attributes, 
 otherwise they would not be separately treated. This distinction is thus 
 stated by Quen. (I, 300) : " The essential attributes of God are distin- 
 guished neither from the divine essence nor from each other, really or 
 from the nature of the object, as matters altogether diverse, or as two 
 or more different parts (quidditates) , or diverse modes of one and the 
 same simple object, but they are so distinguished only to the reason." 
 
 A distinction from the nature of the object would occur if the objects 
 would be different, as body and soul ; but a distinction from reason oc- 
 curs, when anything is only conceived of as distinct, although it is not 
 distinct in fact. Holl. (235) expresses this distinction thus : " Divine 
 attributes are distinguished from the divine essence and from each other 
 not nominally, nor really, but formally, according to our mode of con- 
 ceiving, not without a certain foundation of distinction." To wit, not 
 " nominally because divine attributes imply distinct conceptions. There- 
 fore they differ more than nominally." Nor " really," because " the 
 divine essence is most simple, destitute of all real composition." But 
 "formally" etc., "because we form single conceptions of the operations 
 of the single attributes, although they do not exist separately in the di- 
 vine nature." 
 
 [3] Grh. (Ill, 84) : "The attributes exist inseparably in God; for 
 as it is impossible that the essence of an object be separated from the 
 object itself, so also the attributes cannot be separated from God, since 
 they are the very essence of God." 
 
 [4] Holl. (190) : " By way of eminence, according to which what- 
 ever we discover in creatures to be especially perfect we ascribe in the 
 most eminent manner to God, by virtue of the very familiar principle 
 in nature : Whatever exists in an effect, pre-exists in the cause. From 
 which we infer that all perfections which are in creatures, are in the 
 Creator, either formally or by way of eminence- For indeed, in crea- 
 tures, such perfections shine forth absolutely, as involve in their formal 
 conception no imperfection, but are better than the creatures themselves. 
 Thus we notice in men, the most eminent of visible creatures, the power 
 to understand and to will, wisdom, goodness, justice, etc. These per- 
 fections exist formally, and, indeed, in the most excellent manner, in 
 God." 
 
 While here perfections are ascribed to God which in a certain sense 
 
132 ATTRIBUTES OF GOD. 
 
 can be predicated also of a creature, Grh. (Ill, 86) appends the two- 
 fold remark: (1) That we must be careful to observe that they belong 
 to man only secondarily, but to God originally. . . . " Of God they 
 are predicated essentially, kgoxucQg, and, therefore, altogether in a pecu- 
 liar way ; of certain creatures only accidentally and through a partici- 
 pation and resemblance : of God they are predicated in the abstract ; 
 of creatures only in the concrete. The goodness of God not only be- 
 longs to God essentially, and is itself the essence of God, but also is 
 the cause and rule of goodness in man." (2) That those attributes 
 which in the case of man express an affection, when ascribed also to 
 God do not indicate a weakness or mutability like that of the creature, 
 in accordance with the principle (ibid): u Whatever things are trans- 
 ferred from creatures to God must first be freed from all imperfections, 
 and then only, as that which is perfect, is it to be ascribed to God." 
 (I, 110): " Nor do those affections which Scripture ascribes to God 
 prove any mutability of the Divine essence; for those things which are 
 spoken of avdpoTroiraO&g- ,must be understood deoTrpeTr&s." 
 
 Chmn. (Loc. Th., 29): " It is objected that some things are affirmed 
 of God with respect to time : as, 'the Word was made flesh,' and be- 
 came for us a Creator, aid in times of trouble, and a refuge. There- 
 fore, all this is predicated of God accidentally. Cyril replies : * With 
 respect to creatures, some things are affirmed of God under the limita- 
 tions of time (temporaliter) ; and these are affirmed accidentally,' not 
 because anything happens, with change, to God's substance, but as an 
 accident of the creature in which the change occurs." 
 
 [5] Holl. (191) : " By way of negation, according to which we re- 
 move from God whatever implies imperfection in creatures, and ascribe 
 to him an opposite perfection, according to the self-evident principle of 
 nature, that there is no defect in that which is supremely perfect. Re- 
 lying upon this principle of nature, we call God independent, infinite, 
 incorporeal, immense, immortal, incomprehensible." 
 
 [6] Holl. (190): "Byway of causality, according to which we re- 
 cognize from the effects an efficient first cause; from creatures, a Crea- 
 tor ; and from the most beautiful and wise government of this universe, 
 a most excellent, most powerful, and most wise Preserver and Governor. 
 Here an argument is derived from the most evident axiom: An effect 
 is proved from the cause, and its perfection." N. B. Except in the 
 writings of Grh., we find the method adopted after the time of Diony- 
 sius only incidentally noticed, it is true ; and Holl. even mentions it 
 as that by which we can acquire a natural knowledge of God ; but we 
 may with good reason assign it this place: for, although it is not ques- 
 

 ATTRIBUTES VARIOUSLY CLASSIFIED. 133 
 
 tioned that we obtain a clearer and more comprehensive knowledge of 
 the divine attributes from revelation than natural knowledge teaches, 
 yet we cannot believe ourselves limited, with regard to the divine attri- 
 butes, to the Holy Scriptures in such a way as only to have the single 
 attributes enumerated for us out of the Scriptures ; but we must rather 
 be able from them to form for ourselves such a conception of the Divine 
 Essence as that from which it can deduce the attributes ; and thus, from 
 the standpoint of revelation itself, this threefold way of eminence can 
 be evolved. 
 
 [7] Grh. (Ill, 85) enumerates still other distributions: " (1) Some 
 attributes are predicated at the same time of God and of creatures, such 
 as those by which things are signified which in creatures are accidents, 
 but in God are substances, as when God is said to be good, wise; but 
 others are predicated of God alone, as those by which things which be- 
 long to God alone are explained, as when God is said to be eternal, 
 infinite. (2) Some attributes of God are spoken of properly, as that he 
 is good, wise, etc.; others improperly and figuratively, when, by anthro- 
 popathy, human members and affections are ascribed to him. (3) Some 
 are affirmed of God iji the abstract, as when he is said to be life, good- 
 ness, truth; others in the concrete, as when he is said to be living, good, 
 and true. (4) Some are internal, as infinity, eternity, spirituality; 
 others are external, and these are either inimitable, as omnipotence, etc., 
 or imitable. (5) Some belong to God from eternity, as that he is infi- 
 nite ; others belong to him in time, as that he is the Creator and Pre- 
 server; all of which as relatives do not prove any change made in God 
 himself in time, but denote that a new work has been produced by him, 
 and that a change has been made in creatures." 
 
 Those Dogmaticians who divide the attributes into immanent and ex- 
 ternally operative, usually cite a greater number. Calov. (II, 223, 
 seq.) thus enumerates them: "I. The immanent attributes pertain 
 either to essence, or infinity, or spirituality. To the essence belong 
 God's perfection (and thence, majesty and happiness), unity (and 
 thence, simplicity), truth (and thence, immutability), goodness, holi- 
 ness. To infinity belong immensity, eternity. To spirituality, immor- 
 tality, life (intellect, will). II. To those exerting themselves out- 
 wardly belong omnipotence, omniscience, grace, justice, truth, omni- 
 presence." 
 
 [8] Holl. (238) : " God is said to be one, not in kind, but in 
 number, because he is a being entirely alone, not only in himself undi- 
 vided, but also indivisible, because of the entire simplicity of the divine 
 essence, as there is no composition in God." 
 
134 ATTRIBUTES OF GOD. 
 
 Grh. is the only one who does not consider unity as an attribute, but 
 as a characteristic, of the divine essence. For the relation of the unity 
 of God to the Trinity, see § 19. 
 
 [9] Grh. (I, 124): "But did the work of creation change God, or 
 make him changeable? By no means ; for in time he did that which, 
 from eternity, he had decreed in his immutable will." 
 
 [10] Grh. (Ill, 122) : " The immensity and essential omnipresence 
 of God is thus to be understood (1), that God is present to all things, 
 not only by virtue and efficacy, nor only by sight and knowledge, but 
 also in his entire and individual essence, for he is immense and infinite, 
 not only in power and knowledge, but also in essence ; (2), that God is 
 everywhere present, not owektuq , so as to be comprehended, but cwektlk&c., 
 so as to comprehend and contain all things ; not irepceKroxr and Trepi-ypairTG)?, 
 but TrepLetcTtK&g. The Scholastics say that God is everywhere, not locally 
 or by way of circumscription, . . . nor definitively, . . . but reple- 
 tively ;* yet this must not be understood in a gross and corporeal 
 manner, that God fills all places just as a body which fills its own place 
 in such a manner as to hinder another body from being located in the 
 place which it occupies, but in a divine manner, that God, being con- 
 fined to no place because of the immensity of his essence, contains all 
 places; (3), that God is everywhere present, not by the multiplication 
 of his essence, for he is bloc blov tl, a most simple being, and, therefore, 
 wherever he is he is entire, neither by the division of his essence, . . . 
 nor by extension and rarefaction, . . . nor by commingling; . . . 
 (4), that God is, by his essence, everywhere present, not subjectively, 
 as an accident inheres in a subject, because God is neither composite, 
 nor can he admit of composition, . . . but that he is effectively present 
 as the source and cause of the thing which he effects; for God is not 
 contained in a place, but rather gives to place and the things that are 
 in place their own existence. The presence is («), illocal; (6), indivis- 
 ible ; (c), incomprehensible to our reason ; (tf), effective and operative ; 
 (e), containing within itself all things, like a most minute point." 
 
 Holl. (275) : " God's omnipresence is a divine evepyrjrtKbv attribute, 
 by virtue of which God is present to all creatures, not only by the near- 
 ness of his substance, but also by his efficacious working. The divine 
 presence, according to the Scriptural idiom and its complex meaning, 
 implies two things (1), adcaaraaia, or the substantial presence of God 
 with creatures ; (2), hepyeia, or effectual operation. Therefore, two 
 things are here to be proved (a), that God, with respect to his sub- 
 stance, is everywhere present ; (b), to a full and accurate definition of 
 
 *See Appendix II., under Circumscription. 
 
TIIE WISDOM OF GOD. 135 
 
 the divine presence, the effectual operation also of God as a definitive 
 part is required by the light of the Holy Scripture." 
 
 [11] Quex. (I, 289) : '» God is life (1), essentially, for he is avrd^coo-, 
 having life h savvy (John 5 : 26), i. e., in himself and of himself, by his 
 own nature and essence ; (2), hepyrj-iKug-', effectively, beccuse he is to all 
 the cause and origin of life, or he is the life of all that live, not formally, 
 but causally. (Acts 17 : 28 ; Deut. 32 : 39.)" 
 
 [12] Quex. (I, 289): " Although the knowledge of God is one and 
 simple, and cannot be separated into parts or species, yet, with respect 
 to objects, a manifold distinction is generally observed. This distinc- 
 tion is (1) into natural, or that of simple intelligence, and free, or that 
 of sight. The former, which is called also abstract and indefinite, is 
 that by which God knows himself, and not only those things which are, 
 which have been, or are about to be, but also all possible things, viz., 
 those which can happen and exist, although they never will happen or 
 exist; yea, he is acquainted even with those things which are impossi- 
 ble. The latter, viz., the knowledge of free vision, which is called both 
 intuitive and definite, is that by which God regards all things as present, 
 sees himself in himself, and all other things which at any time have ex- 
 isted, or now exist, or will truly exist, both in himself as in the univer- 
 sal cause, and in their proximate causes and in themselves. The 
 Scholastics add a third, and name it mediate, according to which they 
 say that God is acquainted with those things which can exist, with the 
 condition interposed that it is limited to that which the creatures, if 
 created with certain conditions, would be free to do, or would be al- 
 lowed to effect. Natural knowledge precedes every free act of the will. 
 Free knowledge is said to follow a free act of the will. Mediate know- 
 ledge is said indeed to precede an act of the will, yet in such a manner 
 that it sees something as future only on the hypothesis of such will. 
 
 [13] Br. (191 and 192) discusses the topic of the will of God, not as 
 a separate attribute, as many Dogmaticians do, but as supplementary to 
 the attribute of wisdom ; and from the will of God deduces the attributes 
 of holiness, justice, and truth. 
 
 Holl. (261): "The will of God is the divine essence itself, con- 
 ceived of under the mode of power, seeking the good and shunning the 
 evil that is known by the intellect." 
 
 The nature of the divine will is more particularly described as 
 follows : 
 
 Br. (193) : " The will of God is distinguished into natural and free. 
 According to the former, God is said to will that which he is not able 
 not to will. According to the latter, he is said to will that which he 
 
13i3 ATTRIBUTES OF GOD. 
 
 was able also not to will, or to will the opposite. According to the 
 former manner, he is said to will himself; according to the latter man- 
 ner, created things." 
 
 Holl. (262): "You say: The necessity to will and love himself 
 seems to be an imperfection in God, both because it is like the mode of 
 operation of natural agents, which is imperfect, and also because free- 
 dom is a greater perfection than necessity. Reply: Necessity in acting 
 is threefold. One is violent, which is from without. A second is 
 natural, which is, indeed, from within, yet is inanimate or at least irra- 
 tional. Both are imperfect. A third is natural, vital, and in the highest 
 degree voluntary. This is a great perfection, and such a necessity to 
 will and love exists in God in respect to that which is a supreme and in- 
 finite good. Yea, this necessity is more perfect than the freedom to 
 which it is opposed." 
 
 Br. (194) : "The free will of God is distinguished (1) into effica- 
 cious and inefficacious. That is efficacious by which God wills some- 
 thing to be effected. Inefficacious is that by w r hich something in itself 
 pleases God, although he does not intend to effect it. The efficacious 
 will again is divided into absolute, by which God wills something with- 
 out a condition; and conditional, by which, he wills something under a 
 condition; (2) into absolute, by which he wills that something be effected 
 by his own absolute power, or by his power as not bound by second 
 causes; and ordinate, by which he wills that something be effected by 
 his own ordinate power, or by his power as bound to second causes and 
 to a certain order of means appointed by himself; (3) into first or ante- 
 cedent, by which he wills something from himself alone, or entirely from 
 his own inclination, without any regard being had to the circumstances; 
 and second or consequent, by which he wills something with a considera- 
 tion of the circumstances, or in consideration of a cause or condition, re- 
 garded with respect to the creature for which he wills something." 
 
 Br. (198) : "A distinction of the divine will also occurs, into a will 
 of the sign and of the purpose. The former is meant when the name 
 will is ascribed to an effect or object of the divine will, namely as to a 
 sign of a will in God. The latter denotes the act itself of the divine 
 will, by which it wills anything. Whence it is manifest that the dis- 
 tinction is analogical. But we must take care not to imagine such a 
 will of the sign as to conflict with the will of the purpose which the sign, 
 according to the plan (ex instituto), ought to signify." 
 
 [14] Holl. (246) : " God is holy, (1) independently and by his es- 
 sence : creatures dependency and through a quality superadded to the 
 essence ; (2) immutably, inasmuch as the holiness of God cannot fail, or 
 
 
DIVINE GOODNESS. 137 
 
 undergo a change like that of a creature, James 1:17; (3) efficiently, 
 because he is the author of all holiness, 1 Thess. 5 : 23 ; (4) by way oj 
 example, since the holiness of God is the model of all holiness, which 
 the holy sons of God perpetually contemplate and imitate. This imita- 
 tion the Heavenly Father demands of them, Lev. 11: 44; cf. Lev. 
 19 : 2; 1 Pet. 1 : 16 ; (5) objectively, because the holiness of God must 
 be sacredly recognized and celebrated by us, Is. 6:3." 
 
 [15] Quen. (I, 293) : "The objects of the divine omnipotence are 
 not only such things as God wills to do, but also such as are in any way 
 possible, and, therefore, all those things which do not involve contradic- 
 tion, as (1) such as have no mode of existence. Thus God is unable to 
 render a deed undone ; (2) such as imply a fault or defect, as to be able 
 to lie, to sin, to die. For to do such things is not a proof of power, but 
 of impotence. The potentia of God is not separated from divine potestas, 
 dvva/iis, from kZovoia* as the Calvinists wish ; for, although these can be 
 distinctly conceived of, and among other things outside of God have 
 frequently been separated, yet in God they are most intimately joined, 
 and are one and the same thing." 
 
 "Although divine power is unique, yet because of its different rela- 
 tions, it can be distinguished into absolute, by which God can most ab- 
 solutely effect whatever can exist; and ordinary, which the accustomed 
 government of the universe displays. By the former, God can frame a 
 new world, from the stones raise up children to Abraham (Matt. 3 : 9); 
 the latter preserves the order established in nature. By this absolute 
 power God can do many things, which, nevertheless, he does not do by 
 his ordinary power." 
 
 [16] The divine goodness is differently viewed by Quex., Holl., 
 and others. 
 
 Quen. (I, 287) : " The goodness of God is that, by which, of him- 
 self and by himself, he is supremely good, Matt. 19: 17; Mark 10: 
 18." 
 
 Holl. (245) : " The goodness of God is the conformity of the divine 
 essence to the divine will." 
 
 * [" Potentia denotes a merely factitious power, which can be exerted at will, 
 like dvva/utg ; potestas, a just and lawful power, with which a person is intrusted, 
 like k^ovaia.'" — Doederleiris Latin Synonyms.] 
 
 10 
 
 
138 THE TIUNITY. 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 Of the Holy Trinity * 
 
 § 19. The Doctrine is a Mystery. 
 
 r | ^HE Holy Scriptures declare that God is but one, and yet 
 -*- they also ascribe Divinity to three, viz., Father, Son, and 
 Spirit ; and thus we learn from them that there is one God, but 
 that this one God is Father, Son, and Spirit. Here a proposition 
 is stated which is altogether beyond the grasp of reason ; the 
 doctrine it contains belongs therefore to those we designate as 
 mysteries. [1] Concerning this mystery the Holy Scriptures 
 alone can give us any information, therefore upon them alone 
 this doctrine is based. [2] But the Holy Scriptures do not un- 
 veil for us this mystery ; they rather reveal the doctrine as a 
 mystery, and it is therefore to so great an extent a mystery, that 
 we here upon earth can never attain to a perfectly correct con- 
 ception or comprehension of it, [3] and at best can only approx- 
 imate this by analogies drawn from the sphere of human knowl- 
 edge. [4] Therefore the Church desists from any attempt to 
 fathom this mystery, but applies in this case most rigidly her 
 rule of extracting the substance of her faith alone from the Holy 
 
 * The doctrine concerning the Trinity can properly be treated of as distinct 
 from that concerning God in general, for we should first discuss the essence and 
 attributes of God in themselves, and then the particular manner in which this es- 
 sence subsists and thus becomes common to three. 
 
 Quen. (I, 284): " The consideration of God is twofold, one absolute, another 
 relative. The former is occupied with God considered essentially, without respect 
 to the three persons of the Godhead; the latter, with God considered personally. 
 The former explains both the essence and the essential attributes of God : the latter 
 describes the persons of the Holy Trinity, and the personal attributes of each 
 one." 
 
 Cal. (Ill, 1): " The doctrine of the divine persons follows the doctrine of the 
 divine attributes. This doctrine explains the mystery of the Holy Trinity, in or- 
 der that we may know who is the one, true, and eternal God, whether, as he is 
 one in essence, he is so also in person, or not; and who these divine persons are, 
 who are to be regarded as the one, true God ; namely, that according to the Cath- 
 olic faith, the yare Father, Son, and Holy Ghost." 
 

 TIIE DOCTRINE IS A MYSTERY. 139 
 
 Scriptures. She simply assigns to herself the task of most care- 
 fully collecting and arranging the subject-matter of what the 
 Scriptures teach in regard to this mystery, and is the more ur- 
 gently impelled to do this, because the matter in hand is one of 
 no less importance than to learn what conceptions God wishes us 
 to form concerning himself. [5] Therefore she demands of every 
 one, who wishes to belong to the Church, that he believingly ac- 
 cept this revelation contained in the Holy Scriptures. [6] The 
 Church, when she sets forth this doctrine, is moreover fully jus- 
 tified in the use of such terms as do not occur in the Holy Scrip- 
 tures; for, inasmuch as the opponents of this doctrine, when it 
 was stated only in the terms employed in the Holy Scriptures, 
 perverted the meaning of these and gave them a different inter- 
 pretation, the Church was compelled more specifically to explain 
 in what sense these scriptural expressions, taken in their connec- 
 tion, are to be understood ; and this, of course, had to be done in 
 terms which were not contained in the Scriptures, for their very 
 purpose was to explain the sense in which the Church under- 
 stands the statement of the Scriptures. [7] And this explains 
 why it is that the doctrine of the Trinity only gradually assumed 
 the form in which the Church now sets it forth, and how un- 
 grounded is the inference that the doctrine is not fully indorsed 
 by the Holy Scriptures, and that it was not from the first be- 
 lieved by the Church. [8] And finally the Church, in using these 
 terms, neither presumes that she has unfolded the mystery, nor 
 does she intend that these expressions are to be taken precisely 
 in the sense in which they are generally used ; for, inasmuch as 
 we have here to do with a doctrine that is entirely beyond the 
 reach of reason, the terms that are applicable to other things are 
 inadequate, and the Church therefore still always thus explains 
 the particular sense in which she wishes these expressions to be 
 understood. [9] 
 
 The Church arrives at the doctrine of the Trinity by observing 
 that in the Holy Scriptures, on the one hand, the unity of God 
 is taught; and on the other, Divinity is ascribed to three, Father, 
 Son, and Spirit; that, accordingly, a certain distinction is recog- 
 nized in God, and a plurality in him is indicated. [10] These 
 predicates concerning God, contained in the Holy Scriptures, of 
 
140 THE TRINITY. 
 
 unity, plurality, and diversity, the Church combines in the for- 
 mula : 
 
 The one divine essence subsists in three persons ; or (what is the 
 
 same thing), 
 
 In the Deity there are three persons and one essence ; or, 
 
 God is one in essence, but the same God, one in essence, is threefold 
 
 in person. 
 
 The doctrine of the Trinity, therefore, is that in which a pe- 
 culiar and incomprehensible application of the term three to the 
 divine persons is taught, but in such a manner that not anything 
 composed of three, but three persons of one essence are postu- 
 lated. God is triune, therefore, because, in essence one, he has 
 three modes of subsistence. [11] 
 
 The meaning of this formula is further explained by the 
 Church as follows: 
 
 (1) The unity therein expressed is that of the divine essence. [12] 
 This unity of essence is, more specifically, a numerical unity 1 
 i. e., it is of such a nature that it can be predicated only of one. 
 Hence, it follows that when it is said that the Father, Son, and 
 Spirit are one, these three are not to be designated as three Gods, 
 each having a special divine essence (Symb. Athanas.: Non tres 
 Dii, sed unus Deus) ; and that we are not to associate with the 
 word being [Wesen, essentia] exactly the same signification that 
 it has when applied to man (essentia hominis), for that is just the 
 difference between the essential nature of God and that of man, 
 that God's nature is one numerically, and that of man is one in 
 in kind. [13] Father, Son, and Spirit are, therefore, God in such 
 a sense, that entire divinity is predicated of each of the three ; 
 the one and undivided essentia is ascribed to the Father, Son, and 
 Holy Spirit. The one and undivided divine essence is entire in 
 each [14] (tota in singulis), whence it further follows that, as in 
 God there is no objective distinction between nature and attri- 
 butes, divinity as well as all its attributes must be ascribed to 
 each of these three. [15] 
 
 (2) A plurality in God, and, therefore, a certain distinction 
 between Father, Son, and Spirit, is indeed clearly taught in the 
 Holy Scriptures, but this is (a) no plurality of essence (plural - 
 itas essentialis), as has already been shown ; further, it is (F) no 
 
HYPOSTATIOAL SUBSISTENCE. 141 
 
 plurality of accident (pluralitas accidentalis), i. e., personality is 
 not something added to the being of God, as a special peculiarity 
 or characteristic, for the principle applies to God : In Deum 
 nulla accidentia cadunt. [16] (§ 18, note 2.) Plurality may 
 perhaps be best described as a pluralitas hypostatica seu person- 
 arum, [17] i. e., as one, according to which each of the three 
 persons is to be conceived of as a self-subsistent subject ; which 
 statement, however, must be at once qualified by the x remark 
 that we are to stop with this, and dare not press the analogy oi 
 the word any further. For there is always this difference in the 
 word person when used with reference to God or man, respect- 
 ively, that in the latter case it signifies a self-subsistent subject, 
 which has its own essence, while in the Trinity there is only one 
 undivided essence, of which all the three persons of the Godhead 
 partake. [18]. In this sense, therefore, we are to distinguish in 
 the one divine essence three persons, and the distinction between 
 them is to be described as a true and real one. [19] Hence it fol- 
 lows, however, that to each of these there belong certain pecu- 
 liarities distinguishing it from the others (a hypos tatical character 
 or personal peculiarity (nota, notio, relatio), showing a distinc- 
 tion of persons in a common identity of essence). Such peculi- 
 arities we recognize in the various statements made in the Holy 
 Scriptures concerning the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. These 
 statements are of a twofold character ; they either indicate the 
 inner differences that exist in the persons themselves, and de- 
 scribe, in this case, the special mode of subsistence of the single 
 persons (rpoTroc W^eur, the peculiar method of subsisting, through 
 which and by reason of which each person is distinguished from 
 the other), or they describe the special relation which the single 
 persons hold to the world. Hence we have to distinguish the 
 internal and external peculiarities (proprietates, notiones), to 
 which there are also corresponding acts by which the individual 
 persons are related to themselves or to the world {opera ad intra, 
 internal acts, which God performs without any creature, within 
 himself — opera ad extra, external acts, when God effects something 
 in creatures, without his own essence). [20] Through these de- 
 clarations of the Holy Scriptures we learn the peculiarities that 
 constitute the distinction between the several persons. Yet we 
 
142 THE TRINITY. 
 
 must not fail to observe that it is the internal characteristics and 
 the internal acts corresponding to them, as described in the di- 
 vine Word, that reveal to us more clearly the distinction of per- 
 sons ; for only the internal works (opera ad intra) are to be re- 
 yarded as such acts as proceed from one particular person, to the 
 exclusion of the others, while the outward works [opera ad extra) 
 are those from which, although predicated directly of one person, 
 the others are still not absolutely excluded. The reason of this, 
 however, lies in the fact, that the opera ad extra are outward 
 operations, which must always be considered as proceeding from 
 the essence of God ; hence, also, in every such operation all the 
 three persons must participate, at least in some degree, as the 
 essence of God, which is common to all three, is only one. 
 Whence follow the propositions: "The opera ad intra are 
 divided, [21] the opera ad extra are undivided." [22] Chemn. 
 (Loc. Th., I, 40). 
 
 The personal peculiarities, moreover, according to the Holy 
 Scriptures, are five : ayewr,aia (the not having been begotten), and 
 paternity in the Father — active procession (spiratio) in the 
 Father and the Son — sonship, in the Son — passive procession in 
 the Holy Spirit. [23] 
 
 The personal acts, or inward operations, are two : (of the 
 Father) generation (of the Father and Son), spiration. 
 
 The opera ad extra are three : (of the Father) creation, (of the 
 Son) redemption, (of the Holy Spirit) sanctification. 
 
 From the peculiarities and acts mentioned in Scripture, accord- 
 ing to which the begetting of the Son is ascribed to the Father, 
 and the sendingpof the Holy Spirit to the Father and the Son, it 
 follows, finally, that we are to assign the first place to the Father, 
 the second to the Son, and the third to the Holy Ghost. [24] 
 
 The Church indicates both, viz., the unity and the distinction, 
 by the term 6/ioovaia^ which it predicates of the three persons. [25] 
 From this unity there is just as legitimately derived the n-ep«#<w? 
 (immanentia, immeatio, circumincessio, inexistentia mutua et 
 singularissima) [the mutual aud most peculiar inherence], by 
 which one person in virtue of the unity of essence is within an 
 other (John 14: 11; 17:21), through which term the error is 
 precluded, of regarding the three persons as subsisting separately 
 

 DISTINCTIONS IN THE GODHEAD. 1-43 
 
 alongside of one another ; as also the equality (so that no one 
 person is greater or less than another, and that the Father can- 
 not properly be called God, by way of eminence ( Kar> H°x*n>\ or 
 be said to be greater than the Son by reason of the mode of sub- 
 sistence). [26] 
 
 The predicates which are to be ascribed to the three persons 
 may accordingly be thus classified : 
 
 Holl. (301) : " I. God the Father [27] is the first person of the 
 Godhead, neither begotten nor proceeding, but from eternity be- 
 getting the Son, the substantial image of himself, and with the 
 Son from eternity breathing forth the Holy Spirit, creating, pre- 
 serving and governing all things, [28] sending his Son as the Re- 
 deemer, and the Holy Spirit as the Sanctifier of the human 
 race." 
 
 11 II. The Son of God [29] is the second person of the God- 
 head, begotten of the Father from eternity, [30] of the same es- 
 sence and majesty with the Father, who with the Father from 
 eternity breathes forth the Holy Spirit, and in the fulness of time 
 assumed human nature in his own person, that he might redeem 
 and save the human race." Id. (305). 
 
 11 III. The Holy Spirit is the third person of the Godhead, of 
 the same essence with the Father and the Son, who from eternity 
 proceeds from the Father and the Son, [31] and in time is sent 
 forth [32] by both, to sanctify the hearts of those who are to be 
 saved." [33] Id. (329). 
 
 [1] Chmn. (Loc. Th., I, 33): "The things that are declared con- 
 cerning the Trinity of persons in the most holy Godhead are wonderful 
 and far above all comprehension of creatures." 
 
 Grh. (Ill, 220): "The mystery of the Trinity can in no way be 
 clearly proved a priori from natural reason, nor ought such an attempt 
 to be made." . . . (Ill, 221): " To learn a doctrine that has been 
 placed far above all comprehension of human reason, human reason can- 
 not be led, from its own principles ; for otherwise it would not be above- 
 reason. But such is the doctrine of the Trinity, as is inferred from 
 Matt. 11 : 27 ; 16 : 17 ; John I : 18, etc." . . . (Ibid.): " The question 
 concerning the one and triune God is, What is God, in himself? To 
 this man cannot rise by the strength of his own reason." 
 
 Kg. (30); " Its sublimity is such that it is virty vow, vxep Idyov, Katvirsp 
 -dcav Kara/j/ipiv (above thought, above speech, and above all comprehen- 
 
1 14 THE TRINITY. 
 
 sion), and therefore, from reason, it neither can nor ought to be attacked, 
 or refuted, or demonstrated, whether a 'priori or a 'posteriori.'''' Quen. 
 (I, 318): " Yea, not even the possibility of this mystery can be obtained 
 from the light of nature, since to reason, consulting its own principles, 
 it seems absurd and impossible." 
 
 Grh. (Ill, 229): " Such is the nature and character of the mystery 
 of the Trinity, and of other mysteries properly so called, that they tran- 
 scend the comprehension of reason, i. e., that reason, without the reve- 
 lation of the Word, cannot attain to the knowledge of them, and that 
 even when the revelation of the Word has been given, reason cannot 
 and ought not to affirm, from its own principles, anything whatever con- 
 cerning them. Therefore, in these mysteries, it ought not also to op- 
 pose its own reasonings to the heavenly truth." 
 
 The question, How, then, must the testimonies he judged which have been 
 produced from heathen writers, for constructing the mystery of the Trinity ! 
 is thus answered (Grh., Ill, 227): " (1) In some there are only simi- 
 lar things, but not the same with Christian doctrine. They agree with 
 us in words ; they differ from us in the explanation and meaning of the 
 words. (2) Others teach the same things, but have derived them (a) 
 partly from the reading of the Holy Scripture ; (b) partly from conver- 
 sation with Hebrews ; (c) partly from the revelations of oracles and the 
 Sibyls." 
 
 [2] Grh. (Ill, 217): •' From the proper and only source of theology, 
 viz., from the Word of God, the confirmation of this mystery must be 
 derived." 
 
 Kg.: " The source {jprincipium), therefore, through which this mys- 
 tery becomes known, and ought to be framed, is divine revelation alone, 
 communicated to us in the Scriptures both of the Old and of the New 
 Testament." 
 
 [3] This was implied already in the statement contained in Note 1, 
 viz., that this doctrine cannot be proved from reason by an a posteriori 
 argument. Grh. (Ill, 233) : " The mysteries of faith are above 
 reason, not only in such a sense and respect that reason, without the 
 revelation of the Word, cannot aspire to their knowledge, but also that 
 even with the revelation of the Word, reason still cannot, in any man- 
 ner, comprehend the same ; because in 1 Cor. 2:14, not only to yvCwat 
 (the knowing), but also to dsxeo-Oat (the receiving), .spiritual things is 
 denied the natural man, and if reason were to judge concerning these 
 things, it judges that they are fiopla (folly)." 
 
 [4] Hfrffr. (44) : " Is it possible, nevertheless, for this plurality 
 of unity to be, in any wise, adumbrated by certain analogies or most 
 
ADUMBRATED IN THE CREATURE. 145 
 
 rude outlines? In the entire universe, nothing can be found to express 
 the mystery of the adorable Godhead. For God, the Creator, surpasses 
 creatures by immense intervals of degrees ; yet, in order that we may 
 be able even to stammer something concerning so great a mystery as 
 this, and to raise up and excite our thoughts to the adorable sublimity 
 of the same, pious antiquity has attempted to adumbrate so great a 
 matter by analogies derived from creatures." (47) : " Yet, in all these 
 analogies, the points of unlikeness are greater than those of likeness ; 
 for there is nothing in heaven or in earth which can express the nature 
 of the infinite God, nor is there any voice or reason that can adequately 
 explain so great a mystery." 
 
 Grh. (I, 209) : " We must make a distinction between a class of a 
 posteriori declarations and proofs, by which this mystery, first revealed 
 in the Scriptures, is in a manner explained and shown to be not absurd ; 
 and, on the other hand, accurate a priori demonstrations, according to 
 which we absolutely deny that this is able to be investigated or proved 
 by us." The Church Fathers sought for traces of the Trinity in the 
 creature, and found (what they regarded as) reflections of.it {imagines), 
 in intellectual and rational creatures, and traces of it (vestigia), in irra- 
 tional creatures. As to the truths thence derived, Grh. says (III, 224): 
 " (a) They only illustrate, they do not prove ; (b) there is in them more 
 unlikeness than likeness ; (c) they are derived a posteriori, not a priori ; 
 they are not the parents, but the offspring of thought ; (d) we must use 
 them prudently and cautiously : (e) they cannot be presented against an 
 adversary, they can delight a believer." Accordingly, the question 
 " Whether Tliomas Aquinas was right in saying that what the Christian 
 faith declares of the Trinity could be proved from natural reason to be not 
 impossible," is thus answered, " Among Christians, instructed in the 
 Word of God, and embracing by faith the mystery of the Trinity, this 
 can be proved by means of natural reasons ; but among the heathen, 
 ignorant of the Trinity, and among heretics, obstinately denying it, it 
 can scarcely be proved ; for the fact that they pronounce it absurd and 
 impossible, occurs because they presume to judge of this mystery from 
 the principles of reason, without the light of the heavenly Word." 
 
 Quen. (I, 318) : " These natural agreements, and the analogy of 
 created things to this mystery of faith, do not generate faith, but only 
 human opinion." 
 
 [5] Chmbt. (I, 33): . . . "Because we must think of God as he 
 has revealed himself, we believe, acknowledge, confess, and call upon 
 three persons." . . . Although, namely, the Trinity is a mystery be- 
 yond the reach of reason, yet we learn through it what conceptions God 
 
146 THE TRINITY. 
 
 wishes us to form concerning him. Mel. (Loc. Th., I, 19): "The 
 Church acknowledges God as such an eternal and omnipotent Creator 
 as he has revealed himself to be, and, although we cannot thoroughly 
 understand these mysteries, yet in this life, God wishes this our knowl- 
 edge and worship of him to be begun and to be distinguished from that 
 which is false: and in his Word he has propounded, by infallible testi- 
 monies, a revelation, in which we, as the unborn infant in the maternal 
 womb, drawing nutriment from the umbilical vessels, might sit inclosed 
 and draw the knowledge of God and life from the Word of God, in 
 order to worship him as he has made himself known." 
 
 [6] Kg. (30) : " The necessity of believing this doctrine is such that 
 it not only cannot be denied, but even cannot be ignored by any one 
 without a loss of salvation. John 17 : 3 ; John 5 : 11, 12 ; 1 John 2 : 23; 
 John 5 : 23 ; 2 Thess. 1 : 8." More detailed, Grh. (Ill, 209) : " It is 
 necessary for all who are to be saved, to know and believe the mystery 
 of the Trinity : (a) we exclude from men who are to be saved, not only 
 the denial, but also ignorance of the Trinity . . . (b) we do not re- 
 quire of all members of the Church an equal degree of knowledge, since 
 the light of spiritual knowledge and faith is brighter in some and more 
 obscure in others ; (c) nor do we require of those who are to be saved a 
 perfect and full comprehension and an intuitive knowledge of this mys- 
 tery, since we cannot attain this in this life . . . but we assert only 
 this, that for the catholic faith, necessary to all who are to be saved, not 
 a confused and implied, but a distinct and explicit knowledge of the 
 three persons of the Godhead is required." The reason (III, 210) : 
 " Whoever is ignorant of the mystery of the Trinity does not acknow- 
 ledge God as he has revealed himself in his Word, and is ignorant of 
 the definition of God given in the Scriptures. The mystery of the 
 Trinity being ignored or denied, the entire economy of salvation is ig- 
 nored or denied." (211.) 
 
 [7] Chmn. (Loc. Th., I, 36) : " Even in ancient times it offended 
 many that the Church, in speaking of the article of the Trinity, was 
 not content with the simple peculiar phraseology \_proprietas~\ which the 
 Son of God himself employed when revealing the doctrine concerning 
 God, and which the Holy Ghost followed in the prophets and apostles; 
 but that it introduced into the Church foreign appellations from the ir- 
 religious schools of the heathen . . . and the orthodox fathers were 
 oppressed with great hatred by the heretics on this specious pretext, 
 viz., that the Church ought not to believe concerning the inaccessible 
 light of the Godhead otherwise than as the Godhead himself, coming 
 forth from the hidden abode of his majesty, has manifested himself; 
 
WHY DESCRIBED IN PHILOSOPHICAL TERMS ? 147 
 
 neither ought it [the Church] to speak otherwise, but that it should imi- 
 tate the language of the Holy Ghost, and, therefore, express also the 
 very words in just so many syllables and letters. For neither ought 
 the weakness of the human mind to assume this to itself, viz., in regard 
 to these mysteries placed above and beyond the sight of human intelli- 
 gence, to hope to be able to speak more becomingly and skilfully than 
 the Son of God himself, who alone knows the FatherJ and has revealed 
 to us what we know of God, or the Holy Ghost, who alone knows the 
 things which are of God (1 Cor. 2 : 10), and searches also the very 
 depths [of God]. . . . Both Arius and Sabellius had a. specious pre- 
 text : 'We speak of divine mysteries in no other way than God himself 
 speaks in Scripture. Moreover, we have been cast out of the Church 
 for no other reason than that we were not willing to mingle philosophy 
 with the doctrine of the Church, i. e., we are not willing to confess one 
 essence and three persons, because Scripture is ignorant of these heath- 
 enish appellations.' We must consider whence, with what purpose, and 
 for what reasons, these foreign terms were received ; and, in order that 
 we may understand the entire matter better, let us observe two things: 
 1. What Cyril says with very great force, that, although these terms 
 are not found in Scripture, with such a meaning, yet, that the things 
 themselves, which the Church understands and signifies by these terms, 
 have been expressly laid down and revealed in Scripture. 2. That the 
 Church departed from the simple usage of Scriptural words, not from 
 any wanton affectation of novelty, but, as Augustine elegantly and 
 truly says, that, by the necessity of speaking, these terms were acquired 
 from the Greeks and Latins, because of the errors and snares of heretics. 
 . . . The Church would have preferred to use such simplicity of speech, 
 so that, as it believes, so it might also speak, viz., that there is one God, 
 the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. But contests of heretics arose, attacking 
 partly the unity of God, and partly the Trinity, yet so artfully that when 
 they confessed that there is one God, they understood it as though there 
 were a plurality of gods, nevertheless called one God, just as the heart of 
 believers is called one, Acts 4:12. . . Because, therefore, the heretics 
 spake with the Church, and yet believed differently, and by means of forms 
 of expression, resembling the truth, as Nazianzen says, spread poison se- 
 cretly among the inexperienced, who suspected no evil when they heard these 
 men speak in the very same words which the Church uses ; the men of the 
 Church endeavored to find in Scripture terms by which they might draw 
 forth from ambush the lurking heretics, so as to prevent them from deceiving 
 by ambiguous phrases the unwary. And because Scripture thus speaks, 
 2 Peter 1:4; Gal. 4 : 8, they said that there is one divine nature. But 
 
148 THE TRINITY. 
 
 tills term they corrupted by sophistries, and by distinguishing between 
 God and [divine] nature, as when it is said that God and nature have 
 done nothing in vain. Likewise, in 1 John 5 : 7, it is written: 'There 
 are three,' etc. And because in the words of Baptism it is said : ' Bap- 
 tizing them in the name of the Father,' etc., they said that there are 
 three names . . . Sabellius received this, but understood that one and 
 the same person is rpi6vvjuo<r [possessed of three names], just as one and 
 the same man has a prcenomen, a nomen, and a cognomen . . . After- 
 wards it began to be said that there were not only three names, but also 
 three peculiar significations (proprietates) of the names. Sabellius con- 
 ceded also this, but in this sense, viz., just as the soul has three powers, 
 each one of which has its own peculiarity (proprietas), and yet there is 
 only one soul. And thus, the heretics who certainly did not believe 
 aright concerning these articles of faith, spake in the very same words 
 in which the Church spake, and, by this deception, instilled their 
 poison into many unwary ones, who feared no evil, because they heard 
 the same words that are recorded in Scripture, and are proclaimed in 
 the Church. What was the Church to do under these circumstances ? 
 It is very certain that it ought to have done this, viz., to defend against 
 heretics, that faith concerning the article of the Trinity which the Holy 
 Ghost revealed in the Scriptures. But this could not be done in the 
 w r ords of Scripture, because of the petulance of heretics, who cunningly 
 evaded all the words of Scripture, so that they could not be convicted 
 and held fast, and who meanwhile led captive, by this artifice, the minds 
 of the simple. Therefore, it was necessary to seek for such terms as might 
 express, in some other manner, the facts delivered, concerning this article, in 
 Scripture; so that heretics might not be able, by a deceitful interpretation, 
 to elude them . . . Because, therefore, in God there is a divine nature, 
 common to Father, Son, and Holy Ghost and entire in each, and 
 nevertheless, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are distinguished by certain 
 properties, in such a manner that the Father is not the Son, nor the 
 Son the Father, and the Holy Ghost is neither Father nor Son, etc.; the 
 Church, on the maturest consideration, has transferred these terms 
 (pvaia; vKOGraciq) from the common usage of speech to the article of the 
 Trinity, on account of, as Augustine says, the artifices and errors of 
 heretics, in order that thus even the more simple might be able to ob- 
 serve the rule of Athanasius : ' Neither confounding the persons, nor 
 dividing the substance.' " 
 
 [8] Chmn. (Loc. Th., I, 33) : " Neither is it something new, devised 
 by the Council of Nice (as some blasphemously assert that the [doc- 
 trine of] the Trinity was first framed in the Councils of Nice and Con- 
 
THE DOCTRINE WAS HELD FROM THE BEGINNING. 149 
 
 stantinople), while, before that, the Church piously believed that there 
 was one God. But we solemnly declare that it is the most ancient and 
 constant harmonious testimony of the Church from the very beginning." 
 
 [9] Grh. (Ill, 236) ; " Do terms derived from the ordinary usage 
 of language, and adapted to this mystery, retain in this application in 
 every respect the same signification? Reply: By no means, but the 
 Church presents them with the right to its citizenship, and uses them in 
 a peculiar signification." 
 
 Chmn. (Loc. Th., I, 38): " As the Church speaks of subjects of 
 which reason is ignorant, it also employs these terms in a sense some- 
 what different from that in which they have commonly been used." 
 
 [10] A general survey of the doctrine is presented by Baier (208) 
 under the following heads : 
 
 "I. That the Father differs really from the Son, the Son from the 
 Father, and the Holy Ghost from both ; so that one is in fact Father, 
 another Son, and another Holy Ghost. (Christ says that the Father is 
 other than himself, John 5 : 32, 37,. and that the Holy Ghost is other 
 than himself and the Father, John 14 : 16. The same is manifest from 
 the names of the Father and the Son, and that the former is described 
 as begetting, and the latter as begotten, Ps. 2:7; John 1 : 14, 18 ; 3 : 
 16. The Son was sent from the Father, John 16 : 36 ; Gal. 4 : 4. The 
 Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father, John 15 : 26 ; is sent by the 
 Father, 14 : 26 ; by the Son, 15 ; 26.) 
 
 " II. That not only the Father, but the Son and Holy Ghost, also, 
 are true and eternal God. 
 
 " III. That the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are not three gods, but 
 one God." 
 
 Grh. (I, 194) : " The general theory will be comprised under the 
 following heads : (1) That there is one undivided essence of these three 
 persons. (2) That these three persons are truly and really distinct from 
 each other. (3) That they are distinguished by their own personal 
 properties." 
 
 [II] We must carefully distinguish triune from threefold, which is 
 composed of three. Grh. (Ill, 254): "We say that God is triune, 
 but we are forbidden, by the Christian religion, to say that he is three- 
 fold." 
 
 [12] Essence, ovcia, also substance, (piotg, nature. Grh. (Ill, 251): 
 " Moreover, they preferred to use the name essence rather than sub- 
 stance (a) to indicate that God is an ovcia virepovaiog [an essence superior 
 to essence], not included in the categories among which substance is 
 first ; (b) because God, unlike the essences of created things, does not 
 
150 THE TRINITY. 
 
 stand beneath (substafy accidents, but his attributes are his very essence ; 
 (c) because the name, substance, is ambiguous, for it is sometimes put 
 for ovcla, and sometimes for brcdaTaoig." 
 
 Holl. (284): " The word essence, ovala is not indeed found in Holy 
 Scripture in just so many letters, but nevertheless is derived from it by 
 easy inference. For (a) in the Old Testament God is called fllPl* 
 essentiator, therefore he has an essence, and that, too, an independent 
 essence, etc.; (b) in the New Testament God is named 6 &v, Rev. 1 : 8, 
 from which ovala or essence is derived ; (c) a synonym of divine essence 
 is <fiois dtia^ divine nature, 2 Pet. 1 : 4." 
 
 [13] Gmi. (Ill, 239): "A great, yea an infinite distinction presents 
 itself in the predicates, when I predicate of three human individuals, 
 humanity, or human nature, and when I predicate of the three persons 
 of the Godhead, a divine nature, or essence. The essence of men is a 
 universal term, which does not actually exist per se, but is only inferred 
 in thought and conceived of by the intellect. But essence, in that which 
 is divine, is not an imaginary something, as genus or species, but actu- 
 ally exists, although it is communicable." [Chemist. (Loc. Th., 1, 39): 
 " Therefore the Church understands by the term essence not a univer- 
 sal term, as philosophers name human essence, but a divine nature truly 
 existing, 'which is communicable and common to three persons, and is 
 entire in each. But what this is with respect to the definition of the mat- 
 ter, I say is not known, unless ive say that the attributes given in the defini- 
 tion of God are the very essence of God."~\ " The essence with respect to 
 divine persons (a) is not a species, because the persons of the Trinity do 
 not share essence in the manner that individuals share a common na- 
 ture, which diffuses itself in no way beyond that of which it is a part, 
 as it were ; as, man is a species of animal, and Peter is an individual 
 of the human species. (/?) It is not predicated of many individuals 
 differing in numerical essence, as three men are said to differ in num- 
 ber, (y) It is not predicated in the plural form of individuals, for the 
 three persons are not three gods or three divine essences, as Peter, 
 Paul, etc. (d) Neither does it belong to either more or less than three 
 persons, while human essence is not restricted to a determinate number 
 of persons. Of a man I cannot say that all avdpuirdrris [humanity] is in 
 him, but of [any] one person of the Godhead I can correctly affirm that 
 all the fulness of the Godhead is in him. The reason rests upon the in- 
 finity of the divine essence. In three human individuals the essence is 
 one, not in number, but one only in species ; but in the three persons of 
 the Godhead there is an essence one in number and absolutely undi- 
 vided. Human persons are distinguished by substance, time, will, ac- 
 
ALL THE ATTRIBUTES BELONG TO THE ONE ESSENCE. 151 
 
 cidents of mind and body, etc. Thus, the substance of Peter is differ- 
 ent from that of Paul; . ." . but in the Trinity persons are not thus 
 distinguished, for the Son is ouoovato-, duacuviog, awaiSwg with the Father. 
 ... Of human persons it cannot be said that the one is in the other ; 
 but of himself and his Father, Christ says (John 14: 10): ' I am in the 
 Father.' etc. Of human persons it cannot be said that, because of their 
 common nature, where the one person is, there also is the other, be- 
 cause they are locally distinct ; but of himself and the Father, Christ 
 declares (John 8: 29): 'The Father hath not left me alone.' Of hu- 
 man persons it cannot be said that, because of their common nature, he 
 who honors the one honors also the other, nay rather one can be honored 
 while the other is treated with contempt ; but of himself and the Father, 
 Christ says (John o : 23): ' He that honoreth not the Son, honoreth not 
 the Father that hath sent him.'" 
 
 [14] Geh. (I, 194): " The essence of the three persons of the God- 
 head is one and undivided. . . .For, if there are three persons of the 
 Godhead, and, nevertheless, the true God is only one, it follows thence 
 that there is one essence of the three persons of the Godhead. If there 
 would be one essence of the Father, another of the Son, another of the 
 Holy Ghost, one of the two alternatives would undoubtedly follow, viz., 
 either that there is not one true God, or that the Son and Holy Ghost 
 are excluded from the true Godhead." 
 
 Gkh. (Ill, 238): u The word (ovala^ used of God, signifies an es- 
 sence common to the three persons of the Godhead, one in number and 
 undivided, which does not exist partially in the three persons, so that a 
 part of it is in the Father, a part in the Son, and a part in the Holy 
 Ghost ; but, because of infinity and immateriality, is entire in the 
 Father, entire in the Son, and entire in the Holy Ghost." 
 
 Chmn. (Loc. Th., I, 43) cites as different modes of expression em- 
 ployed with reference to the unity of God, the following: "One and 
 indistinguishable nature ; one and the same substance ; simple, one and 
 undivided divinity; one and indifferent essence; in essence there is 
 unity; there are three persons, coeternal and coequal; three persons, 
 of one substance and inseparable equality, one God ; the divinity of the 
 Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, is one; their glory, equal ; their majesty, 
 coeternal; in this Trinity nothing is before, nothing after, nothing 
 greater or less, but the entire three persons are coequal and coeternal to 
 each other. John 10: 30: 'I and my Father are one,' viz., in essence, 
 will, power, and work." On the other hand, he notes as false, the expres- 
 sions : "In essence, he is singular; there are three, eternal, immense, 
 etc.; three Gods, three Lords; essence is distinguished into Father, 
 
152 THE TRINITY. 
 
 Son, and Holy Ghost : in divinity there is that is before and after, that 
 is greater and less." 
 
 [15] Grh, (III, 257) : " There are three, to each of whom belongs 
 the name of Jehovah and God, and, likewise, truly divine attributes, 
 works, and glory, viz., the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost." Therefore, 
 essence is thus defined; Br. (217) : "By the name of essence or ovala, 
 there is meant the divine nature, as it is absolutely in itself, all of which, 
 with its attributes, is most simply one and singular, and, thus, also of the 
 three persons the essence is only one ; so, indeed, that there is also one 
 intellect of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, by which they under- 
 stand ; one will of the three, by which they wish ; and one power, by 
 which they operate outside of the divine essence." 
 
 Quen. (I, 321) : " The divine essence itself is that pertaining to God, 
 by which God is what he is." 
 
 Holl. (284) : "The essence of God is God's spiritual and indepen- 
 dent nature, common to the three divine persons, Father, Son, and 
 Holy Ghost." 
 
 [16] Hfrffr. (48) : "Plurality in the unity of divinity is not acci- 
 dental, for God is most absolute and simple, and no accidents occur in 
 him. Therefore, since there are no accidents, no plurality also can 
 arise hence." 
 
 [17] Hfrffr. (48): "Plurality in unity of the divinity is hypos- 
 tatic, i. e., of persons, for the essence, indeed, of the divinity is one, but 
 the persons are plural; and, therefore, in the mystery of the divinity 
 there are, indeed, distinct persons (alius et alius), but not distinct tilings 
 (aliud et aliud). For the person of the Father is one, and the person 
 of the Son another, and the person of the Holy Ghost another ; yet they 
 are not different things, but the essence of all the persons is one." 
 
 By person, virdaraacg-, there is understood, "an individual, intelligent, 
 incommunicable substance, which is not sustained, either upon another 
 or from another." Thus Chmn., (Loc. Th., I, 39.) This definition is 
 thus explained by Seln. (I, 76) : " A substance is said to he individual 
 and peculiar, in order to distinguish it from accident, and to remove the 
 error of those who have thought that person signifies only a distinction 
 of employments. It is said to be incommunicable, on account of the 
 distinction of persons, because the Father does not communicate his 
 hypostasis to the Son, or Holy Ghost, but each person has his own pe- 
 culiar vnapoiq ml inrap^iq [subsistence and being] ; although essence itself 
 is said to be communicable " (" the subsistence of one person cannot be 
 communicated to another person, for the reason that each person pos- 
 sesses a peculiar and ultimate act of subsistence, so that it cannot be 
 
HYPOSTASIS CONCRETELY OR MATERIALLY CONSIDERED. 153 
 
 farther determined by another person." Holl. (284) : " Not sustained 
 by another, excludes the opinion of those who think that as there are 
 two natures in Christ, so also there are two persons, not only alio nal 
 hllo but also alio? teal alio-." 
 
 Holl. (284) : " An intelligent supposition : a stone, a tree, a horse, 
 are, indeed, called supposita, but not persons, because they are without 
 intellect." 
 
 A still more accurate distinction is made between person, regarded 
 materially, or in the concrete, and person considered formally, or in the 
 abstract. Holl. (ib.) ; " A person, considered materially, is an intel- 
 ligent suppositum. But a suppositum is a vcpiordfievov, or a subsistence, 
 singular, incommunicable, not sustained by another (a singular subsist- 
 ence, not a singular substance; for person, considered in the concrete 
 sense, is not a substance, but a vfiord/ievov, a singular subsistence, which 
 consists of substance and an ultimate mode of subsisting. We call a 
 person a singular v^iardjuevov, and not an individual ; because the latter 
 implies a logical reference to a particular species, which is predicated of 
 the individual. But God is not predicated of the divine persons, under 
 the mode of species, nor do these differ in essences, diverse in number, 
 just as do individuals). But formally or abstractly considered, a person 
 is an independent and incommunicable subsistence of singular, com- 
 plete, and intelligent substance." 
 
 The meaning of this distinction will be more clearly apparent from 
 the definitions of v-rroaracng that we shall presently cite from Quen.; and it 
 is this, that in the latter case, that is made particularly prominent which 
 constitutes the one person a person, in distinction from the other ; while, 
 in the former case, the intention is not so much to indicate this distinc- 
 tion as rather to assert the personality (das Person-Sein) of the Divine 
 Essence. The term person is employed abstractively, if I say the 
 Father is dyewrjroc, for then I mention that which distinguishes him 
 from the other persons ; it is employed concretively, if I say the Father 
 is almighty ; for in that case it is indeed also asserted' that God is a 
 person, and the hypostatical character of the person is asserted also in 
 the word Father, yet in that statement I was more concerned to assert 
 something concerning the Divine Essence, and not so much concerned 
 to give prominence to the personal distinction. 
 
 The term vTtdaraaig- is employed in doctrinal writings as synonymous 
 with person, but strictly speaking there is still a certain difference be- 
 tween them. Holl. (285): "According to , the testimony of Damas- 
 cenus, the Fathers called the same thing hypostasis and person. Nev- 
 ertheless, person differs from hypostasis, in this, that hypostasis is 
 11 
 
154 THE TRINITY. 
 
 common to an intellectual nature, and to one destitute of reason ; but 
 person is affirmed only of an intellectual nature." 
 
 Quen. (I, 320): li "Yir6oTaoiq is received either in the concrete or ma- 
 terially, according as it implies, at the same time, an object itself and 
 the mode of the object, and marks an essence, distinguished by a hypos- 
 tatic character, i. e., a person, in the sense in which Christ is said to be 
 xapanri/p r?]g vnoardueog Qebv, Heb. 1:3; or, abstractly and formally, ac- 
 cording as it designates personality or substance itself, which is an act, 
 mode, or ultimate degree, in which an intelligent nature subsists com- 
 pletely and incommunicably. In this signification the word vTroaraatg is 
 not employed in Scripture, yet can be correctly inferred from its mate- 
 rial signification ; but, in this mystery, virapt-tgis the same as vTrovraoLg." 
 
 The Greek and Latin Fathers did not at once agree in the usage of 
 the terms here employed and in the distinction between vTz6araaiq and 
 Svaia. It was only from the time of Athanasius that the expressions 
 were uniformly used in the sense above given. 
 
 Br. (216): "Although the Greeks and Latins contended for awhile 
 with each other (for the former thought that by the name person, there 
 was designated among the Latins an occupation or external habit, and 
 on this account, three persons did not imply or express the real distinc- 
 tion of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost ; but the Latins thought that 
 vnooraaiq, in the nominative case, denoted the essence itself, so that if 
 three v-kootcluuq are admitted, three essences must be affirmed), neverthe- 
 less, afterwards, when they understood each other better, it came to pass 
 that the Greeks spoke o^rpia npocwKa, and the Latins of three hyposta- 
 ses." 
 
 [18] Chmn. (Loc. Th., I, 39): " Thus, in the Church, the term 
 vTrdaraaig or person is used in a different sense from the common usage of 
 speaking. Among men we know what a person is, among angels we 
 understand what it is. Peter, Paul, and John are three persons to 
 whom one human nature is common, But, they differ very much, (1) 
 in substance, because one entirety is distinct from another (tolus a toto), 
 (2) in time, (3) in will, (4) in power, (5) in work. . . . But in the 
 Trinity, persons are not thus distinguished, as an angel from an angel, 
 and a man from a man (nor do they differ in time, will, power, work ; 
 but, in the persons of the Trinity, there is co-eternity, one will, one 
 power, one working). Likewise, in creatures, it does not follow that 
 where one person is, there, because of their common nature, the others 
 also are. And this distinction must necessarily be observed ; for the 
 mystery at which even the angels are astonished, would not be so great, 
 if the one essence would be three persons, in the manner that Michael 
 
THE REAL DISTINCTION OF THE DIVINE PERSONS. 155 
 
 Gabriel, Raphael are three persons, to whom one angelic nature is com- 
 mon and equally belongs." 
 
 In reference to the two expressions essence and person, Chmn. re- 
 marks (Loc. Th., I, 39): " These are grammatical observations, not idle 
 exhibitions of acuteness ; but if they have no other, they yet have this 
 use, that, with the foundations thoroughly known, we speak very cheer- 
 fully with the Church for the sake of harmony. But, if any one would 
 cavil that the terms essence and person are not sufficiently peculiar to 
 designate this hidden mystery of unity and Trinity, he has this reply 
 that Augustine gives : ' Human language labors from its absolutely 
 great poverty. Nevertheless the term " three persons," has been 
 adopted not for the purpose of expressing this, but so as not to keep alto- 
 gether silent concerning it. For, by this term, the eminence of an in- 
 effable matter cannot be expressed.' " 
 
 [19] Chmn. (Loc. Th., I, 39): "The persons of the divinity do not 
 differ essentially as in creatures, where each one has his own peculiar- 
 ity, nor is there only a distinction of reason therein as Sabellius wished; 
 but they are really distinguished, nevertheless in a manner incomprehen- 
 sible and unknown to us." 
 
 Quen. (I, 326); " They are distinguished really, i. e., they are dis- 
 tinct from each other, even when all operation of the human intellect 
 ceases." 
 
 [20] Chmx. (Loc. Th., I, 42): " Persons are distinguished, not only 
 by interior, but also by exterior marks, derived especially from revela- 
 tion and blessings towards the Church." 
 
 [21] Quen. (I, 414) : " Personal divine actions ad intra are those 
 which are limited to God himself, in such a manner that they, never- 
 theless, as a source of action, pertain to the divine essence, not in so far 
 as it is common to all three persons, but as it has been determined by 
 certain hypostatic characters and properties. Hence, these personal 
 works ad intra have been divided, i. e., they are not common to three 
 divine persons, but are peculiar to only one person or to two persons." 
 
 As in Note 19 above, the question was concerning the distinction be- 
 tween the single persons, so here the question is concerning the distinc- 
 tion between essence and person. 
 
 Quen. (I, 326) answers: "A divine person is distinguished in one 
 way from essence, and in another way from another person ; from the 
 former not in fact but in thought, with its foundation in fact; but from 
 the latter actually, even when all operation of the human intellect 
 ceases." The former distinction is a distinction " not actually, or from 
 the nature of the thing itself, or modally, but in thought, which is proved 
 
156 THE TRINITY. 
 
 as follows : for, if the relation of paternity, filiation, and procession, 
 would be really distinguished from the divine essence, then something 
 real would be superadded to it, and in the divine persons which are con- 
 stituted by these relations, and, therefore, in God himself, there would 
 be a real compounding." (I, 327) . . . "Thus divine essence and 
 relations are actually one thing, and the former is separated from the 
 latter in thought and the apprehension of the mind alone ; or, in other 
 words, by our mode of conception, nevertheless in such a manner that 
 the foundation and occasion of the distinction exists in fact." 
 
 (Id.) (328) : " The true and real distinction of the divine persons 
 does not introduce a division or multiplication of the divine essence. 
 For God is not divided into three persons, but the three persons, distinct 
 from each other, undividedly share the essence, one in number undivided 
 and infinite, in such a manner that each person has the same essence, with- 
 out its multiplication or division. For, in this mystery, several persons 
 are considered hypostatically, not several things essentially. But these 
 three really distinct persons are and remain dfioobcnot" [consubstantial]. 
 
 [22] Quen. (I, 415) : " External actions ad extra, or emanant and 
 transient actions, are those which both relate to an object outside of God, 
 and are performed outside of God, and produce or leave an effect out- 
 side of God." 
 
 Grh. (I, 199) : " These works are undivided, because then the three 
 persons are together and work together. ... In God there is so great 
 unity, and so great power of one and the same essence, that to individ- 
 ual persons individual and peculiar works, which are wrought separately 
 in creatures, ought by no means to be assigned," whence follows the 
 statement: " By one person, named in works ad extra, the entire Trin- 
 ity is meant." Quen. (I, 328) : "The reason of this rule is the unity 
 of the divine essence, the common participation in the power to act, the 
 equality of the operations, and the identity of the works of Father, 
 Son, and Holy Ghost ; and, hence, there then follows an equality of 
 denomination. Nevertheless, this clause must be added to the rule of 
 Augustine; 'The order and distinction of persons being preserved;' 
 for, inasmuch as the Father has an essence from himself, therefore he 
 also acts of himself, the Son acts and works from the Father, and the 
 Holy Ghost from both. John 5 : 19." 
 
 By the addition of this clause: " the order and distinction of persons 
 being preserved," the canon, "the works ad extra are undivided," is 
 more accurately defined ; for the Dogmaticians do not wish directly to 
 call in question the statement that even in the works ad extra the dis- 
 tinction of persons may be recognized. Not without reason, do they 
 
PERSONAL QUALITIES AND PERSONAL CONCEPTIONS. 15T 
 
 believe that in the Scriptures a work ad extra is ascribed to the one per- 
 son and not to another ; and the difference which, notwithstanding all 
 the oneness of essence, is yet indicated in the order which is assigned 
 in the Scriptures to the single persons, and in accordance with which 
 the Father is placed first, the Son second, etc., seems to them to indi- 
 cate also a difference in the order and in the manner in which the single 
 persons work. So CmiN. already states (Loc. Th., I, 42) : " Works 
 ad extra are considered, as Luther has remarked, in a twofold manner ; 
 First, absolutely, and thus they are without distinction, and are called 
 works of the three persons in common. Secondly, relatively, when they 
 are considered in the order in which the persons act, as to what is the 
 property of each person, and what person acts immediately." The 
 order in working and the relation in which the three persons stand to a 
 work ad extra, the Dogmaticians find most clearly stated in Rom. 11 : 
 36, where they refer the H to the Father, the &a to the Son, and the w 
 to the Holy Ghost. Chmn. (Loc. Th., I, 42) : " For, as the apostle 
 speaks of works ad extra, he makes mention of one eternal essence ; to 
 him be honor, not to them. And, nevertheless, as the essence is one, 
 without confusion of persons, it performs works ad extra, common to the 
 three persons, without confusion, but implies a distinction of persons, 'of 
 him, and through him, and to him.' ... In fine, as we believe that 
 there is unity of essence, and, nevertheless, ought not to admit a con- 
 fusion of persons, we must understand also the rule, that works ad extra 
 are common to the three persons, yet in such a manner that the distinctions 
 and properties of the persons be not confounded." The Dogmaticians 
 remark, in general, that sometimes in the Scriptures there is predicated 
 of one person an attribute or an act, from which however the other per- 
 sons are by no means to be excluded, inasmuch as this attribute or act 
 pertains to the Divine Essence and does not peculiarly belong to the one 
 person. Whence they draw the inference that nevertheless this attri- 
 bute must pertain to the one or to the other person in a more eminent 
 sense, either because it belongs more especially to the one or the other 
 person, in accordance with the order which we assign to the three persons, 
 or because in a certain sense it more especially belongs to the mode of ex- 
 istence (Tp6-og vTz&pZeuc) of a particular person. The Dogmaticians say, 
 in this case, that this occurs through appropriation. Grh. (I, 203) : 
 " Hence certain essential attributes are appropriated by the ecclesiastical 
 writers to each person, although, because of the identity of essence, the 
 essential attributes are common to the three persons." Thus there is 
 specially appropriated to the Father, power ; to the Son, love ; to the 
 Holy Spirit, wisdom. 
 
158 THE TRINITY. 
 
 Still another case is mentioned by Quen. (I, 415) : " Personal 
 actions ad extra are in a certain respect and manner, also, essential or 
 common to all three persons, viz., by reason of efficiency or source, and 
 inchoatively, but they are personal or peculiar to any one divine person 
 by reason of their end, or terminatively, because they are terminated in 
 a certain person. Thus, the Spirit has appeared only in the visible 
 form of a dove. The voice from heaven, ' This is my beloved Son,' 
 belonged to the person of the Father alone, and the Son of God alone 
 appeared under the form and habit of man, in the time of the Old Tes- 
 tament, and in that of the New Testament was born of the Virgin 
 Mary, and was made flesh. But, nevertheless, the entire Trinity was 
 operative, with regard to that flesh of the Son alone, and that voice of 
 the Father alone, and that form of a dove of the Holy Ghost alone." 
 
 [23] The Dogmaticians in part distinguish also between the hypo- 
 statical characteristics or 'personal qualities and the personal conceptions. 
 By the former, they understand those peculiarities which one person 
 possesses having distinct reference to another ; and by the latter, the 
 marks by which, in general, one person can be recognized as distinct 
 from another. Thus Quen. (I, 330) ; " Some personal properties are 
 absolute, which have no relation to another person ; such a property is 
 a-yewrjoia, and the not being born (innascibilitas) , with respect to the 
 Father, likewise the not being breathed (inspirabilitas), with respect to 
 Father and Son ; other personal properties are relative, which have re- 
 spect to another person, and constitute an order of things producing and 
 being produced, of which there are only three ; paternity, filiation, and 
 procession." 
 
 Holl. (285) distinguishes: "Personal properties, i. e., relations 
 founded upon a personal act, constituting a person in the being (esse) 
 of a certain person, and, by relative opposition, introducing a distinc- 
 tion from another person " (of such he enumerates three : paternity, 
 filiation, and procession), and u personal notions, i. e., modes of recog- 
 nizing the divine persons and distinguishing them ad intra." These, 
 taken in a wider sense, and constitutively of each person, in the being 
 (esse) of such person, comprehend the personal properties, and as such 
 are regarded the five enumerated in the text. More strictly taken, 
 however, or significatively, i. e, such as do indeed describe the divine 
 persons and indicate the distinction between them, but still do not con- 
 stitute a person, in the being of such person, they are distinct from the 
 personal properties, and there are two of them, viz., ayewqcia and 
 spiratio activa. 
 
 [24] Quen. (I, 327: " From the real distinction of persons, arises 
 
GOD THE FATHER. 159 
 
 their order, both in subsisting and in operating. Nevertheless, we must 
 distinguish between the order of nature, of time, of dignity, of origin, and 
 relation. Among the divine persons, there is not an order of nature, 
 because, they are biiooiaioL [consubstantial], nor of time, because they are 
 coeternal, nor of dignity, because they have the same honor. But there 
 is among them an order of origin and relation, because the Father is of 
 no one, the Son is of the Father, and the Holy Ghost is of both. An 
 order among the divine persons in subsisting is proved from the proces- 
 sion or emanation of one person from the other. For if the Father pro- 
 ceeds from no one, but has his essence of himself, as the fountain and 
 source of the Holy Trinity, and the Son has his essence of the Father 
 by eternal generation, and the Holy Ghost has the same of the Father 
 and the Son, by eternal procession, it follows that the Father is the first, 
 the Son the second, and the Holy Ghost the third person, and this order, 
 both fixed in nature itself and unchangeable, is clearly shown in the 
 formula of baptism. Matt. 28: 19; 1 John 5: 7." Concerning the 
 order in working, which is recongnized in the use of the diacritical par- 
 ticles H, dt-a, h, W e have already spoken in Note 22. 
 
 [25] Grh. (Ill, 243): " The term bfioovciog embraces both, viz., that 
 the Son is of a distinct person from the Father, and that he is of the 
 same essence with the Father." 
 
 (Id.): " For the Father and the Son are not hepoi<moC pf different 
 or diverse essence ; they are not awovaioc, as men who have one common 
 essence, nor only 6/xoiovawi [of like, substance], but bjuoovaioc, having the 
 same essence, eternity, will, work, power, and glory." 
 
 Quex. (I, 320) : " ' o^oovmog is so called from bp&g and ovaia, because 
 the one and undivided essence belongs equally to those persons called 
 
 OILOOVCLOL." 
 
 (Id) : " The term bpoovatog is not scriptural, but in the Council of 
 Nice was unanimously received by the Orthodox against the Arians. 
 But, although it is not read in Scripture, yet it has its foundation there. 
 For what Christ says, John 10 : 30 ; 1 John 5 : 7, is explained ner- 
 vously and briefly by this word, viz., that the Father and the Son are 
 
 b/iooiGcot.'" 
 
 [26] Quex. (I, 328) further adds as a consequence of bfioovaia : " The 
 most perfect communion of all essential perfections, and the identity 
 both of the divine works ad extra and the mode of action, so that they 
 act ravra nai bfioicog [the same things and in like manner], John 5 : 19, 
 although not in the same order." Concerning the latter, see below. 
 
 In the Tczpixuprjciq the Dogmaticians usually also distinguish " -k. essen- 
 tialis, the most singular [unparalleled] immanence of one divine person 
 
160 THE TRINITY. 
 
 in the other," and " n. personalis, that inmost and ineffable permeation, 
 by which the divinity of the 16yog intimately permeates, inhabits, and 
 perfects the assumed human nature," which latter does not belong here. 
 
 [27] Holl. (301) : "The name, Father, is received here not ovaiudtig, 
 or essentially, but vKoarartKug, or personally. The name, Father, essen- 
 tially taken, belongs not to the first person alone of the Godhead, but to 
 all the divine persons equally ; inasmuch as, received in this sense, it 
 introduces a relation to creatures, of whom God is said to be the Father, 
 both on account of creation, as the angels are regarded sons of God, 
 Job 38 : 7, and, on account of regeneration and adoption, as converted 
 and regenerate men, by means of the merit of Christ, apprehended by 
 faith, have obtained this k^ovaia, power or dignity, to become the sons of 
 God, John 1:12. But personally received, the name, Father, is pecu- 
 liar to the first divine person, and introduces a relation to the consub- 
 stantial Son, whom he begat from his essence, as his image, whose Wiog 
 narrip, own Father, he is called, John 5 : 18." 
 
 [28] Quen. (I, 332) : " The characteristic of the Father ad extra is 
 manifested in the work of creation, preservation, and of the government 
 of this universe. For the work of creation is ascribed to the Father, in 
 a peculiar manner, in the Sacred Scriptures, and the Apostles' Creed, 
 i. e.. not exclusively, nor ttjoxiK&s, or only particularly, much less as a 
 principal cause, so that the Son is only an instrument, but on account 
 of personal order, because the Father, through the Son and Holy Ghost, 
 has created, preserves, and governs all things. Gen. 1:1,2; Ps. 33 : 6 ; 
 John 1 : 3. And because to God the Father power is ascribed which 
 especially shines forth in creation." 
 
 [29] Quen. (I, 332) : "The second person is the Son of God, not by 
 vlodeaia, or gracious adoption ; nor on account of gracious and glorious 
 union with God, and love, for thus all the pious, the blessed, and the 
 holy angels are sons of God ; nor on account of his wonderful conception 
 by the Holy Ghost in the womb of the virgin Mary, as the Socinians 
 wish, but through and on account of a true, peculiar, essential, most 
 singular [unparalleled] and inexplicable eternal generation, and thus is 
 the Son of God properly, incommunicably, and /novorpoKog [alone]. In 
 a few words : He is the Son of God, not xa>P iTL > or D y grace, but fvoei, or 
 by nature, John 1 : 14, 18." 
 
 Holl. (305): "Hence, the Son of God is called his own, Rom. 
 8 : 32 ; the only begotten, John 1 : 14 ; existing in the bosom of his 
 Father, John 1 : 18 ; the image of the invisible God, and the first-born 
 of every creature, Col. 1:15; the brightness of the Father's glory, and 
 the express image of his person, Heb. 1 : 3." 
 
SENDING FORTH OF THE SON. 161 
 
 [30] For this reason, according to Holl. (322), there is ascribed to 
 the Father, as a hypostatical characteristic, eternal active generation, and 
 to the Son, filiation, or passive generation, "by which the Son of God is 
 produced by the Father, as his substantial image, really and literally, 
 yet in a manner hyperphysical and inexplicable, by an eternal com- 
 munication of one and the same essence." 
 
 More detailed description of generation. Holl. (322-325): "The 
 generation of the Son of God is not improper, metaphorical, or accidental 
 (as is the regeneration of sinful men) Proof: a. He would not be God's 
 own Son, if his generation were improper or metaphorical ; b. God the 
 Father, in producing his Son, communicated to him his essence in such 
 a manner that he is his image), not physical ("which occurs, in matter 
 and out of matter, in time, according to that which is before and after, 
 and is an essential change from that which has no being into a being." 
 Quen. I, 385), but hyperphysical ("which occurs from eternity, without 
 any succession of time, matter, and change, and which consists alone in 
 the communication of essence." Quen. 1, 385), not temporal, but eternal. 
 Proof: a. From passages of Scripture which testify that the Son is 
 eternal ; b. From the relation between the Father and the Son. The 
 first person is the eternal Father, therefore the second person also is the 
 eternal Son ; c. Because, otherwise, the essence of the Father would be 
 affirmed to be changeable, if, in time, he had begun to beget the Son. 
 Furthermore, from Ps. 2:7: The act of generation is described by the 
 1 to-day,' which is employed concerning an internal divine act, a gener- 
 ation such as is only during a ' a divine to-day,' and, therefore, excludes 
 the flow of time, separates from the past and future, and denotes a per- 
 petual now, or a day of immutable eternity), not external, but innermost 
 (because God the Father produced his own Son, not ad extra, but begot 
 him within his essence ; nor is the Son separated from the Father, as 
 happens otherwise, but remains in his Father's bosom, John 1 : 18 ; nor 
 is the Son only in the Father, but the Father is also in the Son by the 
 inmost communion and mutual neputupqoig), not voluntary, but natural and 
 necessary (but, if the generation of the Son of God were called forth by 
 an act of the will, and were free, and were not necessary or natural, the 
 Son would not be equal and ofioovmog to the Father, for he exists neces- 
 sarily and cannot not be. Here it is well to observe that God the 
 Father, not being constrained, and, nevertheless, not by the purpose of 
 his free will preceding generation, but, from the necessity of his nature, 
 which is, nevertheless, entirely removed from all constraint, begat his 
 Son by a most perfect generation . . . .)." 
 
 Concerning the eternity of generation, Quen. (I, 330) says further : 
 
162 THE TRINITY. 
 
 " This generation of the Son does not occur by derivation or transfu- 
 sion, nor by an action which may begin or cease, but it occurs by an 
 unceasing emanation, like which there is nothing to be found in nature. 
 For God the Father from eternity begat, and always begets, and never 
 will cease to beget his Son. For, if the generation of the Son would 
 have an end, it would also have a beginning, and thus would not be 
 eternal. Nevertheless, this generation cannot be said, for this reason, 
 to be imperfect and successive, for the act of generation in the Father 
 and the Son is considered perfect in work and constant in operation." 
 The consequence of passive generation, is the passive sending forth. 
 Quen. (I, 338): " The consequence of this passive, generation is the 
 passive sending of the Son of God into the flesh, which is not accurately 
 the incarnation of the same, for they differ as former and latter, For 
 he was first sent and, afterwards, made of a woman, Gal. 4 : 4." 
 
 Note. — " The sending forth of the Son of God (1) is not a local and 
 separative removal, as though he had been locally removed from the high- 
 est heaven to the lowest earth, and had been separated from his Heav- 
 enly Father. For this conflicts with the infinite and intimate identity 
 of the persons of the Father and the Son ; (2) it is not an imperious 
 sending forth, but one of free consent, and therefore proves, between the 
 one sending and the one sent, no inequality, which the Arians once at- 
 tempted to derive thence, and as the Socinians at the present day attempt. 
 In divine things a sending forth does not remove equality of persons, 
 but only presupposes an order of origin. (3) The sending forth is not 
 constrained, but is spontaneous, John 4 : 34 ; 5 : 30 ; (4) it is not accu- 
 rately incarnation itself. For the sending forth preceded incarnation, 
 and the latter is the goal of the former, for the Son was sent forth in 
 order to become man." 
 
 According to Grh. (I, 288), the difference between to beget and to 
 create is : "To beget is from one's own substance, to produce something 
 similar, according to essence. To create is to make, out of nothing, 
 something different from the substance of the Creator." Quen. (1, 330) 
 says, indeed : " Although this generation is most peculiar and most true, 
 yet the mode itself of generation is unknown to us and ineffable," and 
 yet he attempts, as follows, to form at least an approximate conception 
 of it: "This divine generation, however, can be adumbrated by the 
 similitude of rays of the sun, flowing from the solar body with a perpet- 
 ual dependence. For, as the sun is not older than its rays, nor the one 
 begetting, before, in time, to the one begotten ; so, the eternal Father, 
 from eternity, generated the Son ; and, just as the sun has, from the 
 beginning, generated its own rays, and even now begets them, and will 
 
PROCESSION OF THE HOLY GHOST. 163 
 
 continue to generate them, and nevertheless, it cannot be inferred thence 
 that the generation of the rays of the sun is not yet perfect, so also, from 
 eternity, God has begotten, and always begets, and will never cease to 
 beget his own Wisdom, and, nevertheless, it cannot on that account be 
 said that the generation of the Son is not yet perfect. The Holy Ghost 
 Ps. 2 : 7, seems to intimate this. In these words, the generation of the 
 Son is expressed in ,the preterite in such a manner that, nevertheless, it 
 is said to occur to-day, because the generation of the Son is present, and 
 will never cease. Yet there is this great distinction between the two : 
 the sun is a substance, but the rays are an accident. But the substance 
 of the Son is the same with the substance of the Father." 
 
 [31] The hypostatic character [of the Holy Ghost] is "passive spira- 
 tion, or the proceeding of the Holy Ghost from the Father and the Son, i. e., 
 the eternal origin of the Holy Ghost, by which he is sent forth, within 
 the bosom of the Godhead, by the Father and the Son, as the common 
 breath of both." Holl. (337.) Quen. (I, 343) : " The origin of the 
 Holy Ghost, by which, within the Godhead, he receives, through an in- 
 effable procession, from the Father and the Son, an essence the same in 
 number." 
 
 Holl. (337) : " It is called passive spiration, not physically, as 
 though it implied passive power or imperfection, but grammatically, be- 
 cause the Holy Ghost is said not to breathe, but to be breathed. Nor 
 are active and passive spiration two spirations, but the spiration is one 
 and the same, which, with respect to the source breathing and produc- 
 ing, is called active spiration, and with respect to the end attained is 
 called passive. In other respects the emanation of the Holy Ghost 
 from the Father and the Son is most absolute." 
 
 " The spiration here understood is not external, like the breathing of 
 Christ upon his disciples, John 20: 22, but internal and immanent, since 
 it occurs within the very bosom of the Godhead ; not transitory and 
 evanescent, as is that of breathing men, but eternal and permanent; be- 
 cause the Holy Ghost proceeds from eternity, as the breath of the Al- 
 mighty, Job 33: 4, and the spirit of the mouth of the Lord, Ps. 33: 6 ; 
 not an accidental but a substantial spiration : for in God there is no acci- 
 dent, nor can the Holy Ghost be produced by an accidental act, as a 
 divine person and substance." 
 
 An analogy for the conception of the procession was sought by some 
 of the Dogmaticians in the going forth of the word from the mouth, 
 and in our spirit. Grh. says, however, concerning the former (I, 321): 
 "But our word proceeds in such a manner from the heart, that there is 
 an evanescent sound, but the Holy Ghost so proceeds that there is a 
 
164 THE TRINITY. 
 
 subsisting person." Of the latter (ibid.) : " The Spirit of God is 
 aoujuarog, of altogether the same nature and essence with himself, but our 
 spirit is corporeal, because an exhalation from the most refined and sub- 
 tle portion of the blood, and not at all of the same nature with the 
 soul." 
 
 Proof of the procession from Father and Son, Holl. (337): "Holy 
 Scripture teaches avroXe^ei, and in express words, that the Holy Ghost 
 proceeds from God the Father. John 15: 26. That the same proceeds 
 from the Son of God is correctly inferred from the name, the Spirit of 
 the Son (Gal. 4: 6), from the 6/ioovaia of Father and Son (John 16 : 
 15), from his reception of omniscience from the Son (John 16 : 13, 14), 
 from the apocalyptic vision of the river proceeding from the throne of 
 the Lamb (Rev. 22 : 1), from the sending of the Holy Ghost from the 
 Son (John 15 : 26), from the breathing of Christ upon his disciples 
 (John 20 : 22), and from the order and distinction of the divine per- 
 sons." 
 
 [32] The consequence of the procession is the temporal sending forth 
 of the Holy Ghost. Quen. (I, 331): " The sending forth, in time, of 
 the Holy Ghost upon and to the apostles and other believers, is the 
 manifestation or consequence and effect of the eternal procession. The 
 latter is eternal and necessary ; the former is gracious, intermitted, and 
 free, and likewise conditionate ; nevertheless this sending forth is not 
 local, and does not introduce an inferiority, because it is not ministerial 
 and servile." 
 
 [33] The scriptural proof we give partly according to Grh., and 
 partly according to Quen. and Hole. 
 
 In the Old Testament Grh. finds indicated : "Where God is spoken 
 of, I, a plurality of persons, and II, by name, a Trinity of persons." 
 
 I. The plurality is shown (I, 186 seq.) : 
 
 (a) By those passages in which it employs the plural Elohim con- 
 cerning God . . . Gen. 20 : 13 ; 35 : 7; Deut. 5 : 26 ; Josh. 24: 19; 
 2 Sam. 7 : 23 ; Job 35 : 10 ; Ps. 149 : 2 ; Is. 44 ; 2 ; 54 : 5 ; Jer. 10 : 
 10 ; 23 : 36, where observe that this plural word is not only construed 
 with a singular verb in very many passages of Scripture (to denote the 
 unity of the divine essence), but even is sometimes joined with a plural 
 verb and adjective (to make known more clearly the plurality of per- 
 sons). 
 
 (&) By the passages in which God speaks of himself in the plural 
 number, Gen. 1 : 26 ; 3: 22; 11 : 7 ; Is. 6 : 8. 
 
 (c) By the passages in which God speaks of God, and the Lord of 
 the Lord ; for there, in like manner, plurality of persons is signified. 
 
NEW TESTAMENT PROOFS OF THE DIVINITY. 165 
 
 Gen. 19 : 24 ; Ex. 16 : 7 ; 34 : 5, 6 ; Numb. 14 : 21 ; 2 Sam. 5 : 24 ; 7: 
 11 ; Ps. 45 : 7 ; 110:1; Jer. 23 : 5, 6 ; 33 : 15 ; Dan. 9 : 17 ; Hos. 1 : 
 7; Zach. 2 : 8, 9. 
 
 (d) By the passages in which mention is made of the Son of God ; 
 for it is necessary that he be also true God. Ps. 2:7; 72 : 17 ; Pro v. 
 30 : 4. Finally, there are to be referred hither all the testimonies of 
 the Old Testament, in which Jehovah is said to send an angel, to whom 
 the name Jehovah or divine works are ascribed ; for then by the name 
 angel is meant the Son of God. who, with the Father and the Holy 
 Ghost, is true God. Ex. 23 : 20, 21. 
 
 II. The three persons in one essence, are proved (I, 190 seq.): 
 
 (a) From the passages in which three persons of the Godhead are 
 distinctly enumerated, Gen. 1 : 1, 2 ; Ex. 31 ; 1, 3 ; 2 Sam. 23 < 2 ; Ps. 
 33 : 6 ; Is. 42 : 1 ; 48 : 16 ; 61 : 1 ; 63 : 7 ; Hagg. 2 : 5. 
 
 (h) From the passages in which the name of Jehovah and God is 
 thrice repeated in one connection ; for there, according to the corres- 
 ponding mode of revelation of the Old Testament, three persons of the 
 Godhead are implied. Numb. 6: 23-26; Deut. 6:4; Ps. 42 : 1, 2 ; 
 67 : 6, 7 ; Is. 33 : 22 ; Jer. 33 : 2 ; Dan. 9:19. 
 
 (c) From the trisagion of the angels. Is. 6 : 3. 
 
 (d) From the passages in which God speaks concerning God, and the 
 Lord concerning the Lord, as above. I, c. 
 
 But of the Old Testament proof-passages for the Trinity, Grh. (Ill, 
 218) says in general : " 1. We do not say this, viz., that in the Old Tes- 
 tament and the New Testament there is the same clearness and evidence 
 of the testimonies concerning the Trinity ; because the clearer revelation 
 of this mystery was reserved for the New Testament. 2. Nor do we 
 wish this, that in a discussion with an obstinate adversary, a beginning 
 be made with the more obscure statements of the Old Testament. But 
 we only assert this, that from the Old Testament some testimonies, for 
 constructing the doctrine of the Trinity, both can and ought to be cited, 
 since God always from the beginning revealed himself thus, in order 
 that the Church at all times might, in this manner, acknowledge, wor- 
 ship, and praise him, namely, as three distinct persons in one essence." 
 
 In the New Testament there is shown, I. The Trinity of persons in 
 God ; and, II. The true divinity of each person. 
 
 I. The Trinity of persons. 
 
 Quex. (I, 324 seq.): "The Holy Trinity is proved in three ways: 
 (1) From 1 John 5:7. (2) From the wonderful theophany at the 
 baptism of Christ, where three persons of the Godhead are manifested. 
 Matt. 3 : 16, 17. (3) From the solemn formula of baptism given by 
 
166 THE TRINITY. 
 
 Christ. Matt. 28: 19. But we cannot be baptized elg- dvofia f the 
 Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, unless the name of these three, as equal 
 in authority, dignity, and essence, be invoked over us. Hence, we ar- 
 gue : He to whose faith, religion, worship, and obedience we are bound, 
 is true God." 
 
 II. The true divinity of each person. 
 
 1. (Quen. I, 329): " The Deity of the Father is proved (1) by the 
 names peculiar to the true God alone ; (2) by attributes, e. g., eternity, 
 infinity, omniscience, omnipotence, etc.; (3) by works truly and purely 
 divine ; (4) by truly divine worship." 
 
 2. (I, 332 seq.): " The Deity of the Son is proved : 
 
 I. From his names. Some names are essential, others personal. 
 Those are essential which express the divine nature and essence of 
 Christ. Personal names are those which designate his person. 
 
 (1) Divine essential names : In the Old Testament, Christ, the 
 branch of David, is called Jehovah, our righteousness. Jer. 23 : 6. He 
 is called Jehovah whom Jehovah anointed, Is. 61 : 1, 8 ; Adonai, Is. 6 : 
 1-3, cf. John 12 : 41. In the New Testament, the Son of God. (a) 
 He is called God absolutely, without any limiting or alienating condi- 
 tion. John 1:1; 20 : 28. (b) To the divine names, the words are 
 added, by which the incarnate Son of God is designated. Thus Paul, 
 Acts 20 : 28. The same apostle, 1 Tim. 3: 16 : Heb. 2: 14 ; John 1 : 
 14; 1 John 4 : 2, 3. (c) To the divine names, epithets are annexed, 
 by which he is declared to be supreme God. For («) Christ is named 
 by St. John the true God and eternal life, 1 John 5 : 20. ((3) By St. 
 Paul, the Son of God is called the great God. Tit. 2 : 13. (y) By the 
 same apostle, Christ is named God over all, blessed forever, Rom. 9 : 5. 
 He is called nvpiog e£ ovpavov, 1 Cor. 15 : 47 ; he is said to be Lord of all, 
 Acts 10 : 36, and therefore Lord of heaven and earth, which is the de- 
 scription of the true God. Matt. 11 : 25 ; Lord of lords and King of 
 kings. Rev. 17 : 14; 19: 16. 
 
 (2) Divine personal names: Christ is called in Holy Scripture, (a) 
 God's own Son, Rom. 8 : 32 ; having God as his own Father, John 5 : 
 18. (b) The only-begotten Son of the Father, John 1 : 14. (c) The 
 Son existing in the bosom of the Father, John 1 : 18. (d) The first- 
 begotten Son, Heb. 1 : 6. (e) The Son above angels, Heb. 1 : 5. (f) 
 The Son equal to God the Father, John 15 : 17, 18. 
 
 II. From Divine Attributes. 
 
 For the Son of God is : (1) Eternal, Col. 1:17; Heb. 13:8; John 
 1: 1, 14; Rev. 1: 8. (2) Immense and omnipresent, John 1 : 48 ; 
 Matt. 18 : 20 ; 28 : 20. (3) Immutable, Ps. 102 : 27 ; Heb. 1 : 12. (4) 
 
CREATION A DIVINE WORK. 167 
 
 Most holy, Dan. 9 : 24. (5) Omnipotent, Rev. 1 : 8; John 10 : 28. 
 (6) Omniscient, John 21 : 17 ; 2 : 25. (7) Most happy and avrapKeararog 
 [perfectly self-contented]; John 16 : 15. (8) Most glorious, 1 Cor. 2 : 
 8; John 17: 5. 
 
 III. The Divine Works of the Son, proving his deity, are either 
 (spiratio^) ad intra, as the active procession of the Holy Ghost, and the 
 sending of the same, of which in its own place ; or ad extra, since in the 
 Scripture divine works ad extra are ascribed to Christ, the Son of God. 
 From them his true deity is effectually proved. Moreover, there is as- 
 cribed to him: (1) The creation of the world, Gen. 1:2; Ps. 33: 6 ; 
 102 : 25 ; Prov. 8 : 30 ; John 1:3; Col. 1:16; Heb. 1 : 10. (2) The 
 preservation and governing of all things, John 5 : 17 ; 1 Cor. 8:6; 
 Heb. 1 : 3. (3) The working of miracles, Ps. 72 : 18. (4) The re- 
 demption of the human race, Hos. 13 : 14; Zach. 9 : 11. (5) The pre- 
 servation and protection of the Church, Matt. 16 : 18. (6) The raising 
 of the dead, Job 19: 25; John 6: 39, 40; 11: 25. (7) Salvation, 
 Matt. 1 : 21. 
 
 IV. The final argument for the deity of Christ is derived from his 
 divine worship and honor. Moreover, there is ascribed to Christ di- 
 vine worship (1) in general, John 5.: 23 ; (2) specifically, Is. 45 : 23 ; 
 Phil. 2:10; John 14:1; Matt. 28 : 19." 
 
 (3) (1,340): "The Deity of the Holy Ghost is proved : 
 
 I. From his divine names. For he is distinctly called Jehovah, 2 
 Sam. 23:2, fTliT tlT) [the Spirit of the Lord] spake by me, cf. v. 2, 
 and Acts 1:16; Is. 1 : 21 ; Ez. 1 : 3, etc,, with Zech. 7:12; Luke 1 : 
 70 ; with 1 Pet. 1 ; 11 ; 2 Pet, 1 : 21 ; Is. 6 : 8, 10, with Acts 28 : 25, 
 seq., etc., etc.; 6e6g } Acts 5 : 3, 4 ; 1 John 5 : 7, 9, etc., etc.; Kphog, 2 Cor. 
 3:17; 1 Cor. 12: 4, 5. 
 
 II. From essential divine attributes; namely, eternity, Heb. 9: 14; 
 Omnipotence, Is. 11 : 2 ; Luke 11 : 20 ; 1 Cor. 12 : 11. Omniscience, 
 1 Cor. 2; 10-12. Goodness and mercy, Nell. 9:20; Ps. 103:11. 
 Omnipresence, Ps. 139 : 7. 
 
 III. From divine works, such as the creation of the universe, Gen. 
 1:2; Job 26:13; Ps. 33 : 6. Preservation, Job 33 : 4. The working 
 of miracles, Acts 10 : 38. Add to these, works of grace and justice, of 
 which Scripture speaks frequently. 
 
 IV. From divine worship, such as namely, (a) from adoration, Is. 6 : 
 3 ; Acts 28 : 25 and 26 ; (b) from invocation, 2 Cor. 13:13; Rev. 1 : 
 4; (c) from faith in the Holy Ghost, Matt. 28; 19." 
 
168 OF CREATION. 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 Of Creation. 
 
 § 20. Creation a Divine Work. 
 r I ^HE doctrine of the Divine works follows next in order to that 
 -*- of the existence, essence, and attributes of the triune God. 
 The first outward work of God (opus ad extra) is the creation of 
 the world. [1] Concerning this creation the Holy Scriptures 
 teach us : 
 
 (1) That it is a work of God, which he accomplished without 
 the co-operation or assistance of any creature, [2] of his own free 
 will, [3] and solely by means of his omnipotent creative word ; [4] 
 a work of the one true God, a work, therefore, of the Triune 
 God. [5] 
 
 (2) As God is, in the true sense of the word, Creator of the 
 world, this fact excludes every conception of a material existing 
 from eternity out of which God only made, prepared, or fashioned 
 the world; on the contrary, the material itself, of which the 
 world consists, was created by God. This is expressed in the 
 propositioD, that the world ivas created from nothing, which is in- 
 tended to mean that there was nothing in existence which God 
 made use of in forming the world, but that everything that exists 
 was first called into being by him. (2 Mace. 7 : 28 ; Rom. 4 : 17 : 
 Heb. 11 : 3 ; Is. 41 : 24 ; Prov. 8 : 22.) [6] 
 
 (3) As a specific beginning of creation is taught in the first 
 chapter of Genesis, this at once excludes the conception of a world 
 existing from eternity. [7] 
 
 (4) The world, if we mean by this term its entire construction 
 and arrangement as existing at the end of the six days of crea- 
 tion, came into being, according to the narrative in Genesis, not 
 at once, but gradually ("during a period of six days God made 
 all things which he created and made, observing an admirable 
 order"). The manner of their production (prdo creationis) is de- 
 scribed in the first chapter of Genesis, and from this account we 
 can distinguish : (a) The creation of matter ; (b) The separation 
 
CREATION THE WORK OF THE ENTIRE TRINITY. 169 
 
 of the different kinds of materials created from nothing ; (c) The 
 arrangement of the rude masses and their construction into the 
 form in which they appeared at the end of the days of crea- 
 tion. [8] We can thus also distinguish between immediate and 
 mediate creation ; the former being the creation from nothing, 
 and the latter the arrangement of the previously created mate- 
 rials. [9] 
 
 (5) The first and highest aim of Creation is the glory of G-od, 
 for God wishes to be recognized and revered as the great God 
 that he is. (Ps. 19: 1 ; Prov. 16 : -i.) But, among all the crea- 
 tures that have, been called into being, man holds the highest 
 place, and for his sake everything else in the world has been 
 created ; therefore, as the intermediate aim of Creation, we are to 
 regard the use and benefit of man. (Gen. 1 : 28.) [10] 
 
 (6) If the world is thus entirely the creature of God, it follows, 
 finally, as is indeed expressly stated, Gen. 1 : 31, that everything 
 in the world was very good, and that, therefore, everything evil 
 that is now in it must be regarded as having entered subse- 
 quently. [11] 
 
 This is all comprehended in the definition : " Creation is an act 
 of God, who is one and alone, and an undivided work of the 
 three persons of the Godhead, by which the Father, through the 
 coeternal Son, in the coeternal Holy Spirit, of his own free will, 
 in six distinct days, formed all things, visible and invisible, not 
 out of some materials coexisting with himself from eternity, but 
 from nothing, for the glory of his own name and the benefit of 
 man; and all things that God made are very good." (Grh. IV, 
 51.) [12] 
 
 [1] The distinction between works ad intra and ad extra^ which we 
 discussed in connection with the doctrine of the Trinity, is not intro- 
 duced by some of the Dogmaticians until they treat of the present topic. 
 
 Quen. (I, 415) divides divine actions ad extra into " actions of 
 power, as the creation and preservation of the world;" into "actions of 
 mercy, as the redemption, calling, regeneration, conversion, and salva- 
 tion of the human race;" and "actions of justice, as the resurrection of 
 the dead, the final judgment, and the damnation of devils and the 
 wicked." 
 
 Concerning the connection of the doctrine of the creation with that 
 12 
 
 
170 OF CREATION. 
 
 of the Trinity, Chain. (Loc. Th., I, 112): " Thus far, in the article of 
 the Trinity, God has been described as he is in his secret nature, and 
 mention has, indeed, been also made of the works of God, but, espe- 
 cially, of those which divinity works within itself, apart from every 
 creature. But God, who has made darkness his hiding-place, and who 
 dwells in inaccessible light, coming forth from his secret abode, has 
 manifested himself, also, in works ad extra, . . . and, because the first 
 manifestation ad extra was made in the work of creation, the article 
 concerning the creation immediately follows.", 
 
 [2] Chmn. (Loc. Th., I, 115) ; "Creation is an action of the one 
 God. This is said, because of those who have proposed a number of 
 sources. It is, likewise, an action of God alone which neither ought to 
 be, nor can be, ascribed to any creature. (Mai. 2: 10; Job 31 : 15; 1 
 Cor. 8: 6; Is. 45: 6, 7; Job 9: 8.)" This statement, at the same 
 time, excludes the opinion of those "who add to God, in the work of 
 creation, the co-operation of nature, in accordance with what occurs in 
 things already framed and set in order" (Chmn. (I, 116) ), as well as 
 of those, also, " who have divided the work of creation between God 
 and the angels" (Grh. IV, 7). 
 
 Calov. (Ill, 897): "In the primeval creation there was no instru- 
 mental cause or means, because God created all things by the Word." 
 
 [3] Quen. (I, 417): "Neither was there any antecedent cause, ex- 
 cept the purpose of God alone, communicating himself, not from the 
 necessity of nature, but from the freedom of his will." 
 
 Calov. (Ill, 896) : "The impelling cause of creation is the immense 
 goodness, from which God, as he wished to communicate the highest 
 good, most freely communicated himself." 
 
 Holl. (357) : " Creation is a free, divine action, because God framed 
 the universe, not induced thereto by necessity, as though he needed the 
 service of creatures, since he is absolutely independent (avTaptigraTOQ}, but 
 freely, as he was able to create, and not to create and to frame, sooner 
 or later, in this or in another manner." 
 
 [4] Hence creation is also described as "not successive, but, with re- 
 spect to every individual being created, instantaneous, for God framed 
 everything, not by any movement or laborious exertion, but when he said, 
 'Let there be light,' immediately there was light." — Holl. (ib.) 
 
 Calov. (Ill, 900): "The action is not properly successive, but in- 
 stantaneous; for the individuals, which God created, he created in an 
 instant, without movement or succession, although, if these be regarded 
 collectively, the creation was completed in six days (wxd^fiepa); not that 
 he devoted those entire days to creation, but that he created something 
 in the moments of each day." 
 
HOW IS CREATION ASCRIBED ESPECIALLY TO THE FATHER? 171 
 
 [5] Calov. (Ill, 889): "The efficient cause of creation is God one 
 and alone." 
 
 Grh. (IV, 4) : "Bat that one true God is Father, Son, and Holy 
 Ghost; therefore, in Scripture, the work of creation is ascribed to the 
 Father and to the Son and to the Holy Ghost. Of the Father it is 
 affirmed, 1 Cor. 8:6. Of the Son, John 1:3; Col. 1 : 16. Of the 
 Holy Ghost, Job 26 : 13 ; 33 : 4 ; Ps. 104 : 30. We conclude, there- 
 fore, that creation is an undivided action of the one and true God alone, 
 viz., of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost." If nevertheless creation, in a 
 special sense, is called the work ad extra of God the Father (compare 
 the section on the Trinity, note 28), this is done only by way of appro- 
 priation, same section, note 22). 
 
 Holl. (352) : " In Holy Scripture and the Apostles' Creed the work 
 of creation is ascribed, in a peculiar manner, to God the Father : (a) 
 Because of the order of working ; for this reason, that what the Father 
 has of himself to do and to create, the Son of God and the Holy Ghost 
 have of the Father, (b) Because, in the work of creation, God the 
 Father, by his most efficacious word of command, manifested his own 
 omnipotence, Gen. 1 : 3. (c) Creation is the first divine work ad extra, 
 and therefore, by appropriation, is affirmed of the first person of the 
 Godhead." 
 
 Chmn. (Loc. Th., I, 115) : " We must not dispute too curiously con- 
 cerning the distinction of persons in the work of creation, but let us be 
 content with the revelation, that all things were created by the eternal 
 Father, through the Son, while the Holy Ghost hovered over them, 
 Rom. 11 : 36. But these tilings are not to be construed into an inequality 
 of persons, as the Arians blasphemously assert that the Son was God's 
 instrument in creation, just as the workman uses an axe. For the 
 prepositions (airo, 6l6l, kv) do not divide the nature, but express the 
 properties of a nature that is one and unconfused." So also Holl. 
 (353) : " The three persons of the Godhead are not three associated 
 causes, not three authors of creation, but one cause, one author of crea- 
 tion, one Creator. Although they are three distinct persons, yet they 
 influence the work of creation with one power. If they were to influ- 
 ence it with a diverse power of working, they w r ould be associated 
 causes." 
 
 [6] Quen. (I, 417) : " There was no material of creation out of 
 which {materia ex qua), with respect to things created on the first day. 
 For they were created on the first day, not from any pre-existing ma- 
 terial, whether eternal or created before, but were made from purely nega- 
 tive nothing. When it is said that the works of the first day were 
 
172 OF CREATION. 
 
 created ' from nothing ' the particle ' from ' does not designate the ma- 
 terial out of which, but excludes it. For, by ' from nothing/ there is 
 nothing else denoted than the starting-point {terminus a quo) ; i. e., the 
 nothing, from which all things are said to have been made, has respect 
 not to the material, but only to the starting-point, and ought to be 
 understood of the order of creation ; and the particle ' from ' can be 
 correctly translated by 4 after/ so that the sense may be : After noth- 
 ing, as the starting-point, from which something was made." 
 
 Chemn. (Loc. Th., I, 115) : '• That the material, from which, was 
 not from eternity, but all things were created from nothing ; i. e., 
 although things did not exist, they began to be when God spake. . . . 
 Moreover, it is said that they were created from nothing, not as we 
 commonly say, ' they contend about nothing,' i. e., about a trifling 
 matter ; but when something is made, springs up, and comes into being, 
 and there is not anything out of which it may be made." 
 
 Grh. (IV, 7) : " They occasion the madness of the Stoics, who de- 
 vised two eternal principles, vdvg- nai vlq, mind or God, and matter, which 
 they imagined was, during the ages of eternity, a confused chaos, and, 
 at a certain time, was at length brought into form by mind." 
 
 In connection with this doctrine, the Dogmaticians call attention also 
 to the difference in the meaning of the words create, beget, and make. 
 <' To create (K*0)> to make from nothing something different from the 
 substance of the Creator. To beget signifies, from one's own substance 
 to produce something like in essence. To make {tl^^) * s adapted also 
 to the things that are manufactured out of material." From the dis- 
 tinction between create and beget, arises the proposition (Holl. (356) ); 
 4 ' God did not create this visible world from his own essence, nor did he, 
 as it were, diffuse this into parts, so that every creature may be said to 
 be a particle of God." 
 
 Calov. (Ill, 899) : " Creation does not consist in emanation from 
 the essence of God, nor in generation, nor in motion, or natural change, 
 . . . but in outward action, by which, by means of infinite power, 
 things are produced from nothing." 
 
 [7] Quen. (I, 421): "The world neither has been from eternity 
 nor could it have been created from eternity." Proof (ibid. 422) : 
 " {a) From the history of creation ; {b) from the end and destruction 
 of the world ; (c) from the eternity, peculiar to God alone ; {d) from 
 the manner of its production, viz.: because all things were created from 
 nothing, it follows that the material from which {materia ex qua) was 
 not from eternity." Whilst it is thus asserted that the world could not 
 have been created from eternity, we still dare not express ourselves in 
 
THE ORDER OF CREATION. 173 
 
 such a manner as though the world had been created at a particular 
 time, since we cannot conceive of a time as having existed before the 
 world. 
 
 Concerning this point the Dogmaticians usually express themselves 
 as follows : Hfrffr. (67): "Moses (Gen. 1) replies, saying; That 
 this mechanism of the world was not always, or from eternity ; but that, 
 in its coming forth, it depended upon a certain beginning of time ; so 
 that, since, in the infinite ages of past eternity, there was no world, 
 God caused the world to come forth in that definite beginning of time" 
 Calov. (Ill, 901) : " The creation of things did not occur from eter- 
 nity, but in that beginning in which all time began to flow. Hence, crea- 
 tion began, not properly in time, but in the first instant and beginning 
 of time. This is called the beginning of the way of the Lord, Prov- 
 8 : 22, before which, as there was no way, no outward action, no work, 
 so also there was no time, no period, no age ; for as the ages began to 
 be framed by the Word, Heb. 11 : 3, so also the creation of all ages 
 began, 1 : 2." 
 
 The question, "Why God did not create the world sooner, and what 
 he did whilst alone and unemployed in that eternity," is repulsed as " a 
 question of madmen curiously inquiring into such things as have no 
 profit." (Hfrffr. (69).) 
 
 [8] Hfrffr. (72) : "From Gen. 1 : 1, seq., it appears that, in the 
 creation of the world, there was a threefold operation of the Creator : 
 
 (1) First, indeed, he created; i. e., although there was no matter be- 
 fore, he produced from nothing that crude and confused corporeal mass 
 which Moses has designated by the names, heaven, earth, and water ; 
 
 (2) Then, during the first three days, he divided these three bodies ; 
 
 (3) At length, during the second period of three days, he completed 
 everything with its garniture.'' 
 
 Quex. (I, 417) : " The action of creation comprises three steps : 
 (1) The production, on the first day, of the crude material, which was 
 the germinal source, as it were, of the entire universe ; (2) The distinc- 
 tion and disposition of simple creatures during the first three days : for, 
 on the first day, he separated light from darkness ; on the second, by 
 interposing the firmament, the waters beneath from those above; and, 
 on the third, the earth from the waters ; (3) The furnishing and com- 
 pletion of the world, which was brought to perfection in the second 
 period of three days ; for, on the fourth day, he furnished the heavens 
 with luminaries ; on the fifth, the water with fishes, and the atmosphere 
 with winged creatures ; and, finally, on the sixth, the earth with ani- 
 mals, and, at last, with the chief of all animate beings, viz., with man." 
 
17*1 OF CREATION. 
 
 The later Dogmaticians usually treat of man as the last of created 
 beings, in a separate section, which they place before that of Providence. 
 But we think we can appropriately here insert the essential features of 
 the topic in the following propositions : 
 
 («) As to his position in the world, the remark of Quen. (I, 511): 
 " God, to give, as it were, the last toucli to the work of creation, framed 
 the most noble of creatures, for w r hose sake he had produced all the rest, 
 viz., man." 
 
 (b) Definition, Koll. (406): "Man is an animal, consisting of a 
 rational soul and an organic body, framed by God, and endowed at the 
 first creation with God's own image, in order that he might sincerely 
 worship the Creator, live a pious life, and attain eternal happiness." 
 
 (c) The first man was Adam. Quen. (I, 543); "Adam, framed by 
 God on the sixth day of the first hexahemeron, is the first of all men, 
 and the parent of the entire human race, throughout the whole globe, 
 1 Cor. 15: 45, 47; Gen. 2: 5. (The antithesis of Is. Peyrere, the 
 founder of the Preadamites (1655), who says that: ' The Gentiles are 
 diverse from the Jews in race and origin ; the Jews were formed by 
 God in Adam, the Gentiles were created before, on the same day as 
 other animate beings. That the origin of the latter is described in Gen. 
 1, that of the former in Gen. 2 . . . That the Gentiles are many ages 
 before the Jewish nation, and, by race and nature, diverse from the 
 same, and survivors of the Noachian flood of the Jews.' . Likewise, 
 that ' the epoch of the creation of the world should not be dated from 
 that beginning, which is commonly imagined in Adam, and that it must 
 be sought for still further back, and from ages very remote in the 
 past.')" Br. (239): "Moreover, in the beginning, God framed only 
 one individual, namely, a male ; woman he afterwards produced from 
 the rib of her sleeping husband, Gen. 2 : 22." 
 
 (d) Of the mode of production, Quen. (I, 512) : " It consists in this, 
 that God made man ( a ) with singular deliberation, taken concerning this 
 work, Gen. 1 : 26 ; (j3) immediately, with his own hands, so to say ; (y) 
 ornately and elegantly; (d) successively (Gen. 2: 7, 21: 22), first (with, 
 respect to Adam), by forming the body, and then breathing into it a 
 soul." 
 
 (e) Of the internal, constitutive principles of man. Quen. (I, 513): 
 " They are the material and the physical form. The material is an ani- 
 mate organic body, before the fall impassible, and not mortal. Gen. 1 : 
 26; Wis. 2: 23. The physical form is the soul, before the fall illu- 
 mined with great light of concreated wisdom and knowledge, Col. 3: 
 10. Therefore, it is pure, and entirely destitute of any sinful stain, 
 
IS HUMAN NATURE THREEFOLD? 175 
 
 Eph. 4: 24." The spirit is thus not enumerated as the third essential 
 part of man. In reference to the passages cited as favoring that view, 
 it is remarked by Quen. (I, 518) : " (1) In such passages Holy Scrip- 
 ture does not understand by spirit, a spirit differing substantially from 
 the human soul, but a superior part of the soul. (2) It distinguishes 
 between, on the one hand, spirit taken for an essential part of man, which 
 thus used is the same as soul, and is not distinguished from it ; and, on 
 the other, as employed for spiritual gifts and those of sanctification, which 
 are conferred by the Holy Ghost upon believers, or for the grace of the 
 Holy Ghost and his operation, viz., the qualities and gifts of the Holy 
 Ghost in regenerate man." [Grh. XVII, 80. " That there are but 
 two parts of man, is proved by (1) Man's creation, Gen. 2: 7. (2) 
 His redemption. For Christ's redemption had to do with man in his 
 entire being, consisting only of soul and body, Gal. 3: 13; 4:5; Luke 
 19: 10. (3) His renewal and sanctification. (4) The Incarnation of 
 the Son ; for he assumed soul and body. (5) The death of man, Ecc. 
 12:7; Acts 7 : 59. (6) The resurrection of the dead, 1 Kings 17 : 21. 
 They urge passages of Scripture, in which the spirit is distinguished 
 from the soul, Luke 1 : 46 ; 1 Thess. 5 : 23 ; Heb. 4 : 12. We reply 
 that the term spirit is sometimes put exegetically for the soul itself, since 
 the soul is a spirit, Gen. 2 : 7 ; 46 : 27. Some understand by spirit t 
 
 1 Thess. 5 : 23, the mind or intellect, by soul, the will and affections, so 
 that we think nothing in mind, desire nothing at heart, do nothing in 
 body, contrary to God's word."] 
 
 (/) The question, " Whether human souls are created daily by God, 
 or are propagated per traducem" is answered thus by Quex. (I. 519) : 
 " The soul of the first man was immediately created by God ; but the 
 soul of Eve was produced by propagation, and the souls of the rest of 
 men are created, not daily, nor begotten of their parents as the body or 
 souls of brutes, but, by virtue of the divine blessing are propagated, per tra- 
 duce?n,by their parents." Quex. (I, 520, seq.) adduces the proof : "(1) 
 from the primeval blessing of God ; Gen. 1 : 28, cf. 8 : 17 ; 9:1. (2) 
 From God's rest and cessation on the seventh day from all work, Gen. 
 
 2 : 2. (3) From the production of the soul of Eve, Gen. 2:21, 22. (4) 
 From the description of generation, Gen. 5 : 3. Just as after the fall 
 Adam begat a son in his own likeness, after his image, not only with re- 
 spect to body but also with respect to soul, so also the rest of men. (5) 
 From Gen. 46 : 26. (6) From the following absurdities, (a) if it be 
 affirmed that souls are created immediately by God, either original sin 
 would be altogether denied or God could not be vindicated from injustice, 
 both of which are absurd; (b) it follows that man does not beget an entire 
 
176 OF CREATION. 
 
 man, or an entire composite being, but only that part of it winch does not 
 give form* to man ; that he does not beget man, for man without form, 
 i.e., soul, is not man. . . . (7) From Ps. 51 : 7." Cf.,yet the following 
 observations of Quen. (I, 519) : " (1) We distinguish between the 
 simultaneous creation of all souls, at the origin of the world, and the 
 daily creation which occurs, now, as often as men are begotten. (2) 
 As human reason, not enlightened by Holy Scripture, knows little that 
 is certain concerning the departure of the human soul from the body, 
 and its condition after its departure, so also it can define nothing certain 
 concerning the origin of the human soul in or with the body. (3) We 
 distinguish between traduction, or the propagation itself of the soul, and 
 the mode of traduction or propagation. That the soul is propagated by 
 parents procreating children, and that souls are not immediately created 
 or infused by God, is sufficiently manifest from the Holy Scriptures, but 
 the mode has not been defined, and, therefore, we refrain from its deter- 
 mination and definition." [Grh. iv. 278: "1. Since the image of God, 
 which was the righteousness, holiness and perfection of the concreated 
 human soul, was propagated by generation, the soul itself must be thus 
 propagated. 2. Original sin. ... 3. The force of the words. Gen. 
 1 : 28. That this was not destroyed by the fall is proved by Gen. 5 : 3. 
 f Adam begat a son,' etc., i.e., i flesh of flesh,' John 3 : 6, by which term 
 not only the body is meant, Gal. 5 : 20. The corrupt image of Adam, 
 therefore, is to be sought not in the body alone of his sons, but in 
 the entire man. . . .5. God did not create a soul for Eve, but trans- 
 ferred it from Adam to Eve, and thus Eve derived her soul from Adam. 
 For as the entire soul is in the entire body, and is entire in every part 
 thereof, the rib of which Eve was formed w r as animated, and therefore 
 she received a soul, not by inspiration or new creation, but by propaga- 
 tion from Adam. Eve's posterity as animated are begotten of animated 
 parents, etc. . . . The explanation of the mode of propagation is most 
 difficult. 1. Some say that the souls of children are enkindled from 
 those of parents as a torch from a torch, flame from flame. 2. Some, 
 that the soul of the child is propagated from that of the parent, not sep- 
 arately, but that the whole is begotten of the whole ; the seed being 
 animated, but not that of either parent separately, but only in the union 
 ordained of God for this purpose. 3. Some, that besides its form, pre- 
 pared for an organic body, it has a divinely implanted force whereby it 
 
 * [The word " form 77 in this connection is used in the scholastic sense of the 
 term, viz.: "Form is the essence of the thing, from which result not only its figure 
 and shape, but all its other qualities.' 7 (Fleming's Vocabulary.) See aho Glos- 
 sary at the end of this volume.] 
 
PROPAGATION OF THE SOUL. 177 
 
 can produce a soul. 4. Some, that the soul of the mother can produce 
 the soul of her offspring by growth, in the same way in which she pro- 
 duces new matter for nourishment. 5. Others attempt to reduce the 
 contrary opinions of creation and propagation to harmony in this way : 
 There is a two-fold production : one with respect to the power of nature, 
 called generation ; another, with respect to the absolute power of God, 
 called creation. Creation, thus taken, is divided into that which pro- 
 ceeds from nothing, and is creation, properly so-called, and that which 
 proceeds from a substance, yet neither necessarily nor with natural 
 power, but in obedience to command. This presupposed, they maintain 
 that God creates a new soul not of the souls of the parents, which, since 
 it thus derives its material from Adam, participates in his guilt. . . . 
 "We leave the mode to be investigated by philosophers ; but, meanwhile, 
 the propagation itself must not be denied, because the mode of the pro- 
 pagation is not manifest.] 
 
 Of the body, Holl. says further (411): "(a) The body is a true part 
 of man, without which he is not a true and entire man." (412) " (b) 
 The human soul has not been cast by God into the body as into a foul 
 prison, by which it is hindered from being able to elevate itself and fly 
 upward to the knowledge, love, and worship of God." (The antithesis 
 of the Mystics.) Of the soul, Holl. (409): "The soul is said to have been 
 breathed into man by God, but not from God. For God did not, from his 
 own substance breathe into man a soul." (417): " The human soul 
 neither flowed forth from the divine essence, nor by spiritual regenera- 
 tion and mystic union with the triune God does it return or flow back to 
 the divine essence." Hence, Br. (237): " God created man, producing 
 his body from the earth, but his soul from nothing, and joining it to 
 the body." 
 
 [9] Quex. (I, 417): " All things were created from nothing, never- 
 theless some immediately, viz., the works of the first day, and others me- 
 diately, viz., by means of the material which God had before created 
 from absolutely negative nothing, viz., the works of the succeeding five 
 days." (Ibid. 418.): u The former is of the highest order, and is crea- 
 tion, primarily or properly so-called, through which God, without the 
 intervention of another, acted immediately upon nothing, by calling 
 forth from it that which has a real and positive essence, but the latter is 
 creation of the second order, secondarily and less principally, yet prop- 
 erly so-called, by which God produced something from a material pre- 
 existing, but crude and altogether confused." 
 
 [10] Quex. (I, 418): "The ultimate end of creation is the glory of 
 God. For in and through creation God manifested (a) the glory of his 
 
178 OF CREATION. 
 
 goodness by sharing his goodness with creatures; (b) the glory of his 
 power, by creating all things from nothing, with his will and word alone; 
 (c) the glory of wisdom, which shines forth from the multitude, variety, 
 order, and harmony of things created, Ps. 19 : 1." 
 
 Grh. (IV, 4); " In order that God, who is invisible by nature, might 
 be known also from things visible, a work was wrought by him, to man- 
 ifest by its visibility the workman." 
 
 Quen. (I, 418): " The intermediate end is the advantage of men. For 
 God made all things for the sake of man, but man he made for his own 
 sake, Ps. 115: 16." 
 
 [11] Chemn. (Loc. Th., I, 116): "To the definition of creation this 
 also belongs, that all things which God made are very good, Gen. 1 : 31 ; 
 "Wis. 1: 13, 14." 
 
 Quen. (I, 418): " From this itself we exclude the defects of nature, 
 which began only after man's fall." 
 
 Calov. (Ill, 902): "Well-pleasing to God are the consequences of 
 creation, the rest from the work of creation, as well as the power and 
 dominion exercised over creatures." 
 
 [12] Quen. (I, 415): " Creation is an external action of the triune 
 God, whereby, to the praise of his name and the advantage of men, in 
 the space of six days, by the command alone of his most free will, he 
 omnipotently and wisely produced from nothing all things visible and 
 invisible." 
 
 Br. (248): " Creation is defined as an action ad extra of the triune 
 God, whereby God, impelled by his goodness, produced this world and 
 all things that are therein, first, indeed, as simple bodies, from no pre- 
 existing material ; then out of simple bodies, as a crude and confused 
 material, he produced mixed bodies ; nay, even independently of all 
 material, he produced immaterial substances, so as, by the direction 
 alone of his will, to frame with power each of these, according to the 
 idea of his mind, and in the space of six days to complete the entire 
 work, to the glory of his wisdom, power, and goodness, and to the ad- 
 vantage of men." 
 
OF PROVIDENCE. 179 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 Of Providence. 
 § 21. The Doctrine taught both by Reason and Revelation. 
 
 u f~^\ OD is not a workman who, when he has completed his 
 ^-* work, leaves it to itself and goes his way" [Augustine] ; 
 but, having created the world, he sustains it and continually 
 cares for it. [1] Therefore the Holy Scriptures never speak of 
 the creation without at the same time alluding to the superin- 
 tending care that is exercised over the world; and in this very 
 fact the Christian finds the highest consolation, that he is per- 
 mitted to regard God as continually present in the world, caring 
 for the greatest just as for the least, and hindered by nothing in 
 the exercise of his care. This consolation we may, indeed, in 
 part derive from the contemplation of the world by the light of 
 nature, and from observing the course of its affairs, but it is only 
 the certainty which Revelation communicates that establishes us 
 immovably in this confidence. [2] 
 
 The Providence of God [3] specially manifests itself, I, in his 
 preserving what has been created in the world ; II, in his coop- ' 
 erating with all that occurs ; and III, in his leading and direct- 
 ing everything in the world. The doctrine of Providence is 
 accordingly divided into the doctrine of Preservation, Concur- 
 rence, an'd Government [4] (Conservatio, concursus, gubernatio.) 
 I. Preservation is the act of Divine Providence whereby God 
 sustains all things created by him, so that they continue in being 
 with the properties implanted in their nature and the powers re- 
 ceived in creation (Holl., 441). The world would fall back 
 again into nothing if God did not continually uphold, not only 
 the various species of creatures and the individuals in them, but 
 also the existing order of arrangement and cooperation which he 
 has assigned the whole ; [5] for created things have no power of 
 subsistence in themselves, but have it only so long as God im- 
 parts it to them. [6] We distinguish, therefore, between creation 
 and preservation only in our conception; in God we must regard 
 
180 OF PROVIDENCE. 
 
 them as existing together ; therefore, preservation is also desig- 
 nated as continued creation. [7] 
 
 II. Concurrence. [8] The doctrine of Divine Providence im- 
 plies far more than merely that God creates and upholds the 
 world. If this were all, then we would have to refer all the 
 changes and transactions that occur in the world entirely to 
 creatures, and God would have no further share in all this than 
 merely to give to his creatures the ability thus to act. But God 
 is to be regarded as, in a far higher sense than this, present in 
 the world. The Holy Scriptures teach us that he is an active 
 participant in all that transpires in the world; that nothing that 
 occurs could take place without him and his active co-operation; 
 that, therefore, every single effect, change, or transaction in the 
 world comes to pass only through the influence of God. In this 
 God is not, indeed, as in creation and preservation, the sole cause 
 of that which happens ; for God has given to living creatures a 
 will that is to be employed in actions, and has imparted even to 
 inanimate things a power which we are to regard as the efficient 
 cause of changes. God's Providence can, therefore, by no means 
 be so regarded, as if he alone were the author of all that is done ; 
 for, in that case, this will, that we must assume in the case of liv- 
 ing creatures, would not have justice done to it, and the power 
 that belongs to inanimate things would not be called into exer- 
 cise: still, God is nevertheless the co-operative cause of all that 
 occurs. In all transactions, therefore, that proceed from a crea- 
 ture, the creature itself is just as much a cause as God is; He, 
 on the other hand, is always to be regarded as co-operating: 
 every change, effect, or transaction that occurs is, accordingly, 
 to be referred at the same time to both, to the creature and to 
 God. [9] This is expressed in the doctrine of the concurrence. 
 Concurrence, or the co-operation of God, is the act of Divine Provi- 
 dence luhereby God, by a general and immediate influence, propor- 
 tioned to the need and capacity of every creature, graciously takes 
 part with second causes in their actions and effects. (Holl. 442.) 
 [10.] While it is certain that God is to be regarded as co-oper- 
 ating in everything that occurs, [1.1] it is no less certain that the 
 manner of his co-operation differs very greatly, varying with 
 the nature of the co-operating causes (the causae secundse) and 
 
THE DIVINE GOVERNMENT. 181 
 
 with the necessities of the case. God co-operates, for instance, 
 in one way when the action is to proceed from inanimate nature, 
 and in a very different way when the second cause, with which 
 he co-operates, is one endowed with freedom. [12] Also, God 
 has one way of co-operating with good deeds and another with 
 those that are evil. [13] The general co-operation of God is, 
 moreover, always to be regarded as immediate, [14j but at the 
 same time also as of such a kind that the effect is not already 
 predetermined (not a previous but a simultaneous concurrence, 
 not predeterminating but mildly disposing), since in that case the 
 effectual participation of the second cause would be excluded and 
 its liberty infringed. [15] 
 
 III. Government • i. e., "the act of Divine Providence hy which 
 God most excellently orders, regulates, and directs the affairs and 
 actions of creatures according to his own wisdom, justice, and good- 
 ness, for the glori) of his name and the welfare of men." (Cal., 
 Ill, 1194.) [16] God actively participates in actions for the ex- 
 press purpose of directing the whole world according to his own 
 purposes. As, therefore, preservation has reference to the exist- 
 ence and continuance of created things, government has reference 
 to the actions that proceed from these creatures. God inclines 
 and leads them according to his will so as to accomplish his de ■ 
 signs : and this government of God extends over the whole as 
 well as over each single part, over the great as well as over the 
 small. [17] 
 
 Inasmuch as God, however, allows men in their freedom to 
 have their own way, as we have already seen under the doctrine 
 of concurrence, this marks distinctly the character of his govern- 
 ment; for he governs in such a manner that this liberty is not 
 restricted. Hence, much is done that would not be done if so 
 wide a range were not allowed to human liberty ; and, accord- 
 ing to the different conduct of men, whom God will not hinder 
 in the exercise of their liberty, God is determined in employing 
 different methods of directing the world for the accomplishment 
 of his designs. This different method is described in the expres- 
 sions, permission, hinder unce, direction, and determination. 
 
 (1) Much is done that cannot at all be said to meet the special 
 approbation of God, but God permits it, suffers it to occur, be- 
 
182 OF PROVIDENCE. 
 
 cause lie does not choose to enforce his own preference by doing 
 violence to or prohibiting human liberty; and so he seeks to ac- 
 complish his aims in some other way (permission). [18] 
 
 (2) Thus God often is content with merely hindering the ac- 
 complishment of what would be contrary to his purposes (hinder - 
 ance). [19] 
 
 (3) He knows, too, how to sway the freely performed actions 
 of men, after they have been permitted by him to occur (whether 
 they be good or evil), in such a way that they must be subser- 
 vient to and in accordance with his own purposes (direction). [20] 
 
 (4) As, finally, he is himself the source from which proceeds 
 all power and ability to act, so he knows also how to attain his 
 own ends by withholding the necessary power, or by holding this 
 within certain limits which it dare not transcend, when men are 
 about to act contrary to his will (determination). [21] 
 
 Of Providence in general, as comprehending preservation, con- 
 currence, and government, we have yet to remark: 
 
 (1) That it affects everything, but not Uniformly ; on the other 
 hand, everything is affected by it just in proportion to the rela- 
 tive importance of its position in the world. And, as man occu- 
 pies the highest place in the world, Providence has special refer- 
 ence to him; most specifically, however, it is exercised with 
 reference to the godly, as (rod's chief purppse in regard to man 
 is his salvation. [22] 
 
 (2) The providence of God ordinarily employs second causes, 
 and thus accomplishes its designs ; but God is by no means re- 
 stricted to the use of these second causes, for he often exercises 
 his providence without regard to them, and operates thus con- 
 trary to what we call the course of nature, and hence arises the 
 difference between ordinary and extraordinary providence. [23] 
 
 (o) Finally, divine providence is exercised differently with 
 reference to that which is evil and that which is good. [24] 
 
 " Providence is the external action of the entire Trinity, whereby 
 (a) they most efficaciously uphold the things created, both as an en- 
 tirety and singly, both in species and in individuals ; (b) concur 
 in their actions and results ; and (c) freely and wisely govern all 
 things to their own glory and the welfare and safety of the uni- 
 verse, and especially of the godly" 
 
THE DIVINE GOVERNMENT. 183 
 
 [1] Grh. (IV, 52): "God, the creator of all, did not desert the 
 work which he framed; but, by his omnipotence, up to the present time 
 preserves it; and, by his wisdom, rules and controls all things in it." 
 
 [2] Grh. (IV, 52): "Scripture joins both, viz., that the faithful 
 heart must believe that God is both ktlgttj- [creator] and irpovorjTTjg- [ a 
 provider], Job 12: 9, 10; Acts 17: 24, 25, 28; Ps. 121: 2. The per- 
 verse imagination that God has left creatures to only their own govern- 
 ing, covers human minds with great darkness, and produces horrible 
 doubts. The very object which is preserved and governed as nature, is 
 a witness to Divine Providence. If you be a disciple of nature, you 
 will find that provision is made for the most trifling and insignificant 
 objects, as well as for the most noble; that upon all are conferred those 
 things which are necessary for their. end; that all continue steadfastly 
 in a fixed and wonderful order; that those things which act without 
 sense or thought nevertheless attain their end; that objects conflicting 
 with each other are so governed that, by breaking the strength of one 
 another, they profit the world by their opposition. But the knowledge 
 of Divine Providence , sought from the book of nature, is weak and im- 
 perfect, not from the fault of nature itself, but from that of our mind ; 
 but more certain and perfect is the knowledge of Divine Providence which 
 is sought from the book of Scripture ." 
 
 [3] Quen. (I, 527): "Providence is so named from providere, and 
 denotes the act of foreseeing and cherishing anxious care concerning 
 objects pertaining to self. ,f 
 
 "The term Providence (Trp6voca) does not occur in the canonical books 
 in the sense in which it is here employed, but only in Wis. 14: 3. But 
 synonymous with it are the expressions : Seeing, Gen. 22: 8; 1 Sam- 
 16: 1; Ez. 20: 6; ordination, Ps. 119: 91; preservation, Ps. 36: 7; 
 dioLKTjGLg, Wis. 12: 18; diaKvpipvr/GLg, Wis. 14: 3; wpdra^ig, Acts 17: 26." 
 
 Scriptural Proof. Holl. (424) : " AJ1 Scripture is nothing else than 
 a brilliant mirror, from which, in whatever direction you turn, the ever 
 watchful eye of providential direction clearly shines forth." Hence Ps. 
 121 : 4, God is called the Keeper of Israel ; (a) Providence preserving 
 is proved from Ps. 36 : 6 ; (b) Providence co-operating from Acts 17 : 
 27, 28 ; (c) Providence governing from Jer. 10 : 23. [Prov. 20 : 24.] 
 
 [4] Providence is divided into these three parts, so far as it is a work 
 of God ad extra. Before it becomes such, however, certain acts must 
 have taken place in God himself, viz., a foreknowledge of that upon 
 which his providential care is to be exercised, and a purpose to exercise 
 this care. If Ave take both of these into the account, Providence may 
 be divided " (a) into Trpdyvcjaig (foresight or foreknowledge) ; (b) -rrp66eGig 
 
184 OF PROVIDENCE. 
 
 (the purpose or decree of God) ; and (c) dtobaioig (the actual preserva- 
 tion, co-operation, or concurrence and governing, with respect to things 
 created)." Br. (303) : " Opinions vary, inasmuch as some contend 
 that, by the name Providence, there is meant not so much the imma- 
 nent acts of the divine mind and will, as the outward act of preserving 
 and governing. Some indeed teach that, by this name, an immanent 
 act is denoted, and they believe that it pertains formally to the intellect, 
 and, by way of consequence, to the will ; others vice versa. Neverthe- 
 less, it is easily perceived that this entire controversy is not so much 
 concerning the thing itself, as the terms. For all concede that to 
 Providence, regarded in its wide sense, there belongs both rrpoyvucig-, or 
 an intellectual act, by which God sees beforehand what will be beneficial 
 to creatures; and irpodeoig, or the act of the will, by which he wills to 
 ordain and dispose the things which he foresees to be advantageous ; as 
 well as SiolKTjair, or the preservation itself (concurrence), and the govern- 
 ment of creatures. Meanwhile, if we pay attention to the force of the 
 words, Providence seems to denote not so much external acts of execu- 
 tive power, as God's care of his creatures, and, therefore, acts of his 
 intellect and will, whence these outward acts proceed. But the order 
 of internal acts is undoubtedly this, that the act of intellect precedes, 
 and the act of the will, or the purpose to confer, according to the sug- 
 gestion of the intellect, those things which are profitable to creatures, 
 follows ; although it does not follow Providence itself so as, together 
 with the previous act of the intellect, to intrinsically constitute it. But 
 if the usus loquendi be considered, it must be acknowledged that, to the 
 acts of preservation (concurrence) and governing, which are the effects, 
 signs, and marks of Providence, the name of Providence itself, accord- 
 ing to an ordinary metonymy, is not unfrequently ascribed." 
 
 Holl. (421 and 422) : " The providence of God, with respect to 
 npdyvuoLg- kcu irpddeGi?, is an internal act* of the divine intellect and will ; 
 with respect to 6ioiK^aar, an external action. Strictly speaking, the provi- 
 dence of God is a divine action ad extra; for it is occupied with creat- 
 ures, and thus is directed to that which is outside of God. In this 
 stricter sense, the actual providence of God is only the preservation, 
 co-operation with, and government of creatures ; but foreknowledge, 
 and the decree concerning the preservation and governing of things, are 
 presupposed as acts of the divine intellect directing, and of the will 
 commanding." 
 
 *[" Action and act are not synonymous. Act does not necessarily imply an ex- 
 ternal result, action does. We may speak of repentance as an act; we could not 
 call it an action. 11 — Fleming's Vocabulary of Philosophy. ,] 
 
BASIS OF THE DIVINE FOREKNOWLEDGE. 185 
 
 With reference to foreknowledge it is remarked : («) That the ex- 
 pression to know beforehand only inaccurately describes God's knowledge 
 of everything, since the knowledge of God is not mediated by a suc- 
 cession of time and of thought, as ours is, but is rather intuitive, by 
 virtue of which he sees everything, the past, the present, and the future 
 at once, as it were in a mirror. Grh. (IV, 66) : " In our knowledge 
 there is a two-fold activity of thought. In the first place, only according 
 to succession, since, when we understand anything in an act, we en- 
 deavor to understand something else ; secondly, there is another activity 
 of thought, according to causality, since, by means of premises, we come 
 to the knowledge of conclusions. Neither of these belongs to God ; not 
 the first, because he sees all things in one, i. e., in himself, just as we 
 see many things at the same time in a mirror ; nor the second, because 
 this presupposes a first, and because such a process is from that which 
 is known to that which is unknown ; but God already sees the effects in 
 himself as a cause." Qden. (I, 539) : " Upoyvuaig^ or foreknowledge, is 
 ascribed to God only avdpu-oiraBug (anthropopathically), since it is prop- 
 erly the foreknowledge of future things ; but to God there is nothing 
 future, but all things are present, not indeed actually by way of exist- 
 ence, but objectively, and therefore he foresees nothing, but sees all 
 things most absolutely in a perpetual, abiding, and immutable now, so 
 that in God there is rather TravreTroipia than npdyvaoig." 
 
 (b) The question, "Whether foreknowledge bring necessity to things 
 foreknown, or whether it be certain that things are foreknown by God 
 in such a manner, that now, by some necessity, they cannot occur other- 
 wise?" Hutt. (Loc. Comm., 256) answers thus: "Neither harmon- 
 izes with the truth. For every object is foreseen or foreknown by God 
 as it is in its own nature, and according to its results, so that this fore- 
 knowledge depends upon the event* but the event does not depend upon the 
 foreknowledge. As Jerome infers : ' The foreknowledge of future things 
 does not make that which God knew would take place immutable ; for, 
 because of God's knowledge of future things, it is not necessary for us 
 to do that which he foreknew ; but what we will do according to our 
 own will he knows as future.'" . ... . Still further: "It is one thing 
 when I say that with respect to divine foreknowledge, something is im- 
 mutable or occurs necessarily ; but another thing, when I say that a 
 thing is immutable because of God's foreknowledge, or, what is the 
 same, that foreknowledge brings necessity to things foreknown. The 
 former assertion is orthodox, but the latter is not; inasmuch as the lat- 
 ter expression names a cause, on account of which the matter cannot be 
 otherwise ; but the former denotes only the truth and certainty of the 
 13 
 
186 OF PROVIDENCE. 
 
 divine foreknowledge, and means nothing else than that God, as omni- 
 scient, knows already from all eternity what issue everything would 
 have. In this respect it is said correctly : ' Things foreknown occur in 
 that manner in which they have been foreknown, and not causally with 
 respect to foreknowledge, as though this caused things foreknown to oc- 
 cur in this manner and no other,' but only conditionally, in so far as 
 God knew matters in no other way than as they would occur from their 
 own causes, and indeed freely. Therefore, when something occurs now 
 in this manner, it is correctly said, with respect to divine foreknowledge, 
 that it could not have occurred in another manner, according to the 
 well-known rule : ' Everything that exists, exists necessarily, when it 
 exists.' " 
 
 Grh. (IV, 69): " If you do not yet fully perceive the subject, thus 
 regard it : The foreknowledge of God does not bring immutability to ob- 
 jects a priori, but only a posteriori; i. e., when God knows that a thing 
 is, it is necessary for it to be. Nevertheless, in the meanwhile, a thing 
 by its own nature, and with respect to its own cause, could be other- 
 wise, and then God would have foreknown it otherwise. Things either 
 present, or past, or future, do not depend upon knowledge, but knowl- 
 edge depends upon the thing and event w 7 hich is foreknown as just such 
 as it is, so that if it would not have been, this very thing also would have 
 been foreseen by God." 
 
 Related thereto is the question : " Whether the divine foreknowledge 
 rests upon a previous decree?" which Holl. (432) answers thus: 
 " The foreknowledge and decree of God concerning future things are 
 eternal and simultaneous on the part of God; but, according to our 
 mode of conception, the foreknowledge of God precedes the divine 
 decree." 
 
 [5] Holl. (441): " God preserves species and individuals. Species 
 he preserves by keeping the essences of objects from destruction, and 
 imparting to them constancy. Individuals lie preserves, by substituting 
 new individuals in the place of those that perish, so that the essence of 
 species may remain constant." 
 
 Ciimn. (Loc. Th., I, 125): " It is the office of Providence to watch 
 over and aid the order which it has given to nature, so that every sub- 
 stance has its becoming strength, motions, and actions." 
 
 [6] Grh. (IV, 83): " Created things subsist not of themselves, and 
 from their own strength, but God upholds all things by the word of his 
 power, Heb. 1:3; Col. 1:17; Acts 17 : 28." 
 
 Holl. (441): " Divine preservation is an act not merely negative or 
 indirect, for it does not consist in the fact that God does not wish to de- 
 

 THE INFLUENCE OF SECOND CAUSES. 187 
 
 stroyor annihilate the things that he has framed, but to leave to them 
 their strength, as long as they can flourish and endure from the energy 
 given to them by creation ; but it is a positive and direct act, by which 
 God, through a true and real influence, imparts himself (influit) in a gen- 
 eral way to the efficient causes of the objects that are to be preserved, so 
 that in their nature, properties, and strength, they continue and remain." 
 
 [7] Quen. (I, 531): "God preserves all things by the continuance 
 of the action by which he first produced things. For the preservation 
 of a thing is, properly speaking, nothing else than a continued production 
 of it, nor do they differ except by a designation derived from without." 
 Holl. (441): (Creation and preservation) " are distinguished by dif- 
 ferent connotatives. For creation connotes that the object had not ex- 
 isted before ; preservation supposes that the object had existed before. 
 Creation gives a beginning of being; preservation, a continuance of 
 being." 
 
 [8] The Dogmaticians do not all assign this place to the doctrine of 
 the divine Concurrence; the earlier ones, as Grh. and Cal., divide the 
 subject of Providence into only preservation and governing, and discuss 
 the doctrine of the concurrence only in a supplementary way, and among 
 the later ones Baier, after Cal. 
 
 Holl. (440): "Some theologians think that the acts, to the exercis- 
 ing of which, with respect to creatures, Divine Providence is limited, 
 are two, preservation and governing, which latter is said to signify both 
 the general concurrence with second causes [Acts 17 : 25, 26 (Br.)]; 
 and the special direction of the action of created things." [1 Kings 18: 
 44 ; Judges 16 : 28, 29 ; Gen. 17 : 16, 17, 19 ; Deut. 28 : 23 (Br.)]. 
 
 From the time of Quen. it became customary to enumerate three 
 acts of providence. Practically it matters little what division is 
 adopted, yet the latter division has this in its favor, that the manner in 
 which God exercises providence is at once included in the doctrine of 
 providence. It is then declared : 1. That the world cannot exist with- 
 out God's upholding activity. 2. That God is present in the world in 
 such a manner, that nothing, either great or small, happens without his 
 active co-operation. 3. That he is present in the world in such a man- 
 ner, in order that he may direct everything in it according to his own 
 purposes." 
 
 [9] Quen. (I, 531) : " God not only gives second causes the power 
 to act, and preserves this, but immediately influences the action and 
 effect of the creature, so that the same effect is produced not by God 
 alone, nor by the creature alone, nor partly by God and partly by the 
 creature, but at the same time by God and the creature, as one and the 
 
188 OF PROVIDENCE. 
 
 same total efficiency, viz., by God as the universal and first cause, and 
 by the creature as the particular and second cause." The action of God 
 and the action of man are simultaneous actions. Quen. (I, 545) : "In 
 reality, the influence of God is not one action, and the operation of the 
 creature another, but the action is one and indivisible respecting both, 
 and dependent upon both, upon God as the universal cause, upon the 
 creature as the particular cause. As an act of writing, the same in 
 number, depends upon the hand and the pen, and one part does not depend 
 upon the hand and the other upon the pen, but entirely upon the hand 
 and entirely upon the pen : so God's concurrence is not prior to the 
 creature's own action, by the priority of causality, since it is, in fact, 
 entirely the same action. Hence God, just as also the second cause, 
 produces the entire effect, which comes to pass by an exterior action of 
 God, inwardly included in the action of the creature, one and the same 
 with it." 
 
 As scriptural proof, the following passages are cited: Job 10 : 8; 38 : 
 28; Is, 26: 12; Phil. 2: 13; especially Acts 17: 28: " In him we 
 live, and move, and have our being." Quen. (I, 532) : '"We have 
 our being' in God as the one preserving; ' in him we move,' i. e., all 
 our actions and movements we perform by his concurrence, so that with- 
 out his concurrence we cannot extend even a finger, or produce even 
 the least movement." 
 
 If, thus, every change, effect, or act which comes to pass is ascribed 
 at the same time both to God and to the creature, the Dogmaticians in- 
 quire whether we do not encroach upon the doctrine of Providence ; or 
 whether, if we maintain the integrity of this doctrine, we do not ex- 
 clude the co-operation of the creature and all its free movements. 
 Hutt. (Loc. Com., 228) thus states the objection : "If all things are 
 subject to divine government, they either can occur otherwise than God 
 decreed from eternity to govern them, or they cannot occur otherwise; 
 if the former, Divine Providence will be deceived ; but if the latter, 
 Divine Providence will certainly bring necessity to things foreseen, and, 
 in consequence, all contingency will be removed. But both are absurd ; 
 therefore, that universal, and, indeed, effectual, Providence or govern- 
 ment of all things will scarcely be able to stand firm." The very pur- 
 pose of the term contingency is to designate the free movement of the 
 creature. 
 
 " That," says Hutt. (256), "is defined as contingent which, when it 
 comes to pass, is neither impossible nor necessary, but has a cause which, 
 from its own nature, could act otherwise, such as the human will ; or, 
 as others . . . define it, 'that is contingent which, by its own nature, 
 
MAY DIVINE PROVIDENCE BE DECEIVED? 189 
 
 can either be or not be, which can be constituted either in this or in an- 
 other manner, or which can happen or not happen, and, before it hap- 
 pens, can be prevented from happening; when, indeed, it does happen, 
 it has a cause which, by its own nature, could act otherwise, and whose 
 contradictory would not be impossible.' As an example . . . the be- 
 trayal by Judas was a contingent event, for Judas could have abstained 
 from that crime, and not have betrayed his Master ; so that when he 
 already actually betrayed him, there was, nevertheless, in him a cause, 
 which, by its own nature, could have acted otherwise, i. e., it could have 
 restrained him from that deed." 
 
 The answer to the above objection he then introduces by means of 
 two distinctions (228) : " The first distinction is this : Everything mu- 
 table and immutable is described in two modes; in one mode, when any- 
 thing by its own nature, per se, absolutely has been so composed that it 
 either can or cannot be constituted otherwise. But in another mode, 
 when something is either mutable or immutable, not per se, but by way 
 of accident; not absolutely, but conditionally. As an example : God is 
 immutably good and wise, per se and absolutely. Angels, likewise, are 
 also immutably good and wise, but not per se or absolutely, but by way 
 of accident ; in so far as, without doubt, they have already been so con- 
 firmed in good as no longer to be able to fall. So, too, as an example 
 of mutability : Adam was mutably good before the fall, for if he had 
 not been such, he would not have been able to fall ; but because he could 
 have remained good if he had wished, this mutability in him is very 
 correctly stated to have existed not absolutely and per se, but only from 
 the condition of his will. Since the fall all believers are in like manner 
 mutably good, but absolutely and per se. For in the state of corruption 
 it could not occur otherwise, because their goodness is mutable. The 
 second distinction is of that which is necessary, or, in other words, ot 
 necessity. For in our theology . . . there is a twofold necessity con- 
 stituted, of which the one is absolute or simple (necessity of consequence 
 (consequentis), of constraint (coactionis) ), the opposite of which is un- 
 doubtedly simply impossible. The other is conditionate necessity (of 
 the consequent (consequentice) , or condition).* That is absolute by 
 
 * [•■ The scholastic philosophers have denominated one species of necessity, 
 necessitas consequential, and another, necessitas consequentis. The former is an ideal 
 or formal necessity, the inevitable dependence of one thought upon another by reason 
 of our intelligent nature. The latter is a real or material necessity, the inevitable 
 dependence of one thing upon another because of its own nature. The former is a 
 logical necessity, common to all legitimate consequence, whatever be the material 
 modality of its objects. The latter is an extra-logical necessity, . . . wholly de- 
 pendent upon the modality of the consequent. 11 (Sir William Hamilton's Discus- 
 sions, etc., p. 144.) ] 
 
190 OF PROVIDENCE. 
 
 which objects are so constituted that nothing whatever in them can be 
 changed, as are those things which are predicated of the essence of God 
 and his attributes. But that is conditionate by which any object indeed 
 lias a cause, on account of which it cannot now be changed or be other- 
 wise constituted, but by its nature, nevertheless, is mutable, and could 
 be changed or be constituted altogether differently." 
 
 Then Hutt. answers the first question, " May Divine Providence be 
 deceived?" as follows: "These two distinctions being presupposed, to the 
 latter member of the disjunctive the categorical and affirmative answer is 
 given, that those things which have been foreseen by God cannot be other- 
 wise constituted, or, as is the same, they are not mutable, except rela- 
 tively and with this condition, namely, that these things are constituted 
 immutably, not absolutely or per se, or, in other words, by absolute ne- 
 cessity, but only by accident, or from the condition of the objects fore- 
 seen. For God foresaw how everything would be and would result, from 
 its own causes, whether natural or voluntary, and in this respect the 
 Providence of God cannot be deceived. But if from their nature they 
 w r ould have been otherwise, God would have foreseen this also, and thus 
 his Providence would not have been deceived, and in this respect it is 
 most correctly denied that things foreseen could be constituted other- 
 wise than as they have been foreseen." 
 
 The second question, " Does Providence, therefore, bring necessity to 
 the things foreseen, and, as a consequence, is contingency removed?" 
 Hutt. thus answers : "A reply is most correctly made by another dis- 
 tinction. But if, indeed, pure or absolute necessity, or necessitas conse- 
 quentis, be understood, it is absolutely denied that Providence brings 
 necessity to things foreseen. For thus no place would be left any longer 
 for natural causes, nor any liberty for the human will. Nevertheless, 
 that both are subordinate to the Providence of God, and can exist, to- 
 gether with it, without contradiction, we have clearly demonstrated in 
 the question immediately preceding. But if the other necessity be un- 
 derstood, which is that of condition, or necessitas consequentice, we very 
 freely concede that objects foreseen by God's Providence are in neces- 
 sary dependence ; because, namely, God foresees these things not othemvise 
 than as they would result from their causes, therefore they result also just 
 as God has foreseen them. Nor, on the other hand, does it conflict with 
 that which by way of consequence is inferred; therefore all contingency 
 is removed. For inasmuch as this necessity of consequence belongs to 
 such things as are, by their own nature, mutable, and could be changed 
 and be otherwise constituted, this necessity and contingency can un- 
 doubtedly exist at the same time as subordinates, although in a different 
 
VARIOUS GRADES OF DIVINE CONCURRENCE. 191 
 
 respect; viz., a necessity, in so far as a thing lias a cause, because of 
 which it can no longer be changed or be otherwise constituted, but a 
 contingency, in so far as the thing itself by its own nature so exists that 
 it could be otherwise constituted. Thus, the betrayal of Judas, with 
 respect to Divine Providence, is said to be necessary by necessity of 
 consequence; because God undoubtedly foresaw from eternity that 
 Judas, from intended malice and with fixed purpose, would betray 
 Christ; but contingent, in so far as he was able to resist the wicked de- 
 sires of his will and not to betray Christ. Nevertheless, if Judas would 
 have done this very thing, God would also have foreseen this from 
 eternity, and thus (by his not betraying) the Providence of God could 
 not have been deceived." The proposition, therefore, stands thus: "A 
 contingency of human affairs and actions can exist most surely, without 
 impairing or diminishing the Providence of God, for the reason that this 
 contingency is not opposed to Divine Providence, but is subject or sub- 
 ordinate to it. For, as the Providence of God governs and determines 
 things one and all, so also does it govern and determine contingent 
 actions. For hence it comes to pass that God does not suffer the 
 wicked to rush on whither they would otherwise tend according to their 
 free will, but he fixes limits to the extent to which he will slacken the 
 reins to their lust. Hence, also, God frequently, by the power exer- 
 cised through his Providence, casts chains and restraints upon the 
 wicked, in order that they may be forced to desist from their under- 
 takings, and altogether abandon the deeds which their unbridled lust 
 would otherwise perpetrate. Esau, the brother of Jacob, who had taken 
 measures to slay his brother, etc., can be given as an example. But 
 even when there is no such hinderance, and God permits those things to 
 occur which the will of the wicked devises, yet there nevertheless shines 
 forth even thence the singular skill of Divine Providence, while it de- 
 rives even thence the means to inflict deserved punishments upon the 
 wicked, and to subvert them, and knows how to change even their worst 
 designs to the advantage and welfare of the godly; of this, the history 
 of Joseph and that of the passion of Christ supply us with examples 
 most worthy of note."* 
 
 [10] Qukn. (I, 544): "The question in this place is not whether 
 God communicates and preserves to second causes, the power to operate, 
 for this mode of concurrence ascribes to God no more than that he pre- 
 serves the existence of objects and their power to act, which he gave 
 them in the beginning; but the question here is, whether God imme- 
 
 * [Compare a chapter from Gerhard, translated in Evangelical Review, vol. xviii. 
 310]. 
 
192 OF PKOVIDENCE. 
 
 diately influences according to the requirement of each, the action, and 
 with the action the effect, as such, of the second causes." Quen. (I, 544) 
 thus defines the terms causa prima et secunda: " The first cause is that 
 which is entirely independent, but from it all other things, if there be 
 any, depend ; this is God. A second cause is that which recognizes 
 another cause prior to itself, upon which it depends; such are the effi- 
 cient created causes, which, although they operate through primary and 
 relative virtue, nevertheless depend upon the first cause, as for their 
 existence, so also for their operation. For existence, I say, because 
 without his preservation they could exist in operating not even for a 
 moment, and because without the cooperation of the same they could 
 neither operate nor, in operating, produce their effects." 
 
 Quen. (I, 532) justly remarks: "With the divine concurrence with 
 respect to the object there coincide the divine omnipresence, which is 
 an act of Divine Providence, and formally and definitively, viz., in the 
 Biblical sense, denotes both the substantial, illocal, incommunicable, 
 illimitable presence with creatures, which the scholastics, in the de- 
 scription of the concurrence of God with creatures, call the immediatio 
 suppositi,* and his efficacious and omnipotent working, which they here 
 call the immediatio virtutis, Gen. 1:2; Ps. 139: 7; Jer. 23: 23, 24; 
 Wis. 1: 6, 7, 8; Acts 17: 27, 28; Col. 1: 17." 
 
 [11] Quen. (I, 531): "The objects of the concurrence are all the actions 
 and effects, as such, of second causes. It is only the general and inde- 
 terminate concurrence that is here discussed, i. e., it is here merely in 
 general asserted that no action is accomplished without the co-operation 
 of God ; but the character of this concurrence is not here taken into the 
 account. It is, therefore, indeed, readily granted, but not here specially 
 developed, that the concurrence maybe 'a special or gracious concur- 
 rence, by which God is present to all believers, meditating, writing, and 
 doing holy, honorable, and useful things, by supplying the occasion, 
 inciting, moving, aiding, approving, etc.;' also c a most special and ex- 
 traordinary concurrence, peculiar alone to the holy writers of the Old 
 and New Testaments, which embraces a supernatural and extraordinary 
 illumination of the mind, and likewise a peculiar movement, suggestion, 
 inspiration, impulse, and dictation of the Holy Ghost, for writing or 
 speaking such a thing and not something else/" (lb. 543.) Thus 
 Holl. (443) distinguishes also between "natural actions" and "super- 
 natural actions" of man : " Some can be elicited by man in his natural 
 strength ; others transcend man's natural strength." The latter he also 
 does not here discuss. In relation to the natural acts, however, he re- 
 
 * [See list of Scholastico-Dogmatic terms in Appendix, under Subsistentia.^ 
 
DIVINE CONCURRENCE IN SINFUL ACTS. 193 
 
 marks: " With natural acts God concurs, indeed, by a general concur- 
 rence, but not exclusively; for extraordinarily, under that general 
 influence, there is also a peculiar influence contained, conferring a more 
 intense strength to act and a more powerful movement upon one crea- 
 ture rather than another." 
 
 [12] Quen. (I, 545) : " With second causes, God concurs according 
 to the need and requirement of each, i. e., when, as often as, and in the 
 manner that, the cause, according to the condition of its nature, de- 
 mands this concurrence. For God does not change the nature of the 
 agents or the manner and order of their action, but he permits natural 
 agents to act naturally, free agents to act freely. . . . With second 
 causes God concurs according to their nature, by operating conformably 
 to his most harmonious, universal disposition, freely with the free, 
 necessarily with the necessary, feebly with the feeble, vigorously with 
 the vigorous." Holl. (444) : " With necessary agents God concurs 
 uniformly, e. g., with fire, in order for it to burn, with the sun, in order 
 for it to shine. With free agents God concurs variously, leaving to 
 them their free decision and the free power to choose this or that ; for 
 the order that God has once established he does not easily change, Ps. 
 119: 90." 
 
 [13] The most difficult problem in the science of Theology is that of 
 exhibiting the method of the divine concurrence in the evil actions of 
 men, without at the same time in any wise throwing the blame of the 
 evil upon the first cause, i. e., upon God. The Dogmaticians employ 
 for this purpose the two formulas : " God concurs in producing the effect, 
 not the defect ; God concurs as to the materials, not as to the form." 
 The former of these is intended to teach that* God has indeed furnished 
 the power through which the action could have become a good one ; but 
 that, if on the part of man this has not been employed for this purpose, 
 the blame for that does not fall upon God. The other formula is in- 
 tended to teach that the power, the ability in itself considered, with which 
 an action can be accomplished, is indeed to be ascribed to the divine 
 co-operation, while the application of it, and the direction which is 
 given to this power, is allotted to human freedom, and is accordingly to 
 be imputed alone to man. One of these formulas we find employed by 
 Quex., the other by Holl. 
 
 Quex t . (I, 545): " We distinguish between the action and the aral-ia 
 of the action ; between the effect and the defect. The Supreme Being 
 concurs with the actions and the effects, but not with the arafta of the 
 actions ; for, although the universal cause influences the entire action of 
 the particular causes, yet indeed, of the dra^la and evil, as such, if it in- 
 
194 OF PROVIDENCE. 
 
 here in an action, there is no other cause than a creature, inasmuch as 
 in acting it departs from its own rule and the order of the First Agent, 
 viz., God, and applies the divine concurrence otherwise than it should. 
 Hence we say in the thesis that God influences the actions and effects, 
 as such, of second causes, i.e., as the actions and effects are, in their 
 entity or essence, to the exclusion of the idea of the defects and faults, 
 which have no entity, and originate from a deficiency of action in the 
 causes. In short, God enters into sinful actions, with respect to their 
 entity and natural form (species nature), and not with respect to their 
 deformity and moral form (species moris). He also concurs in disgrace- 
 ful acts, and is inwardly present to them, yet in such a manner as not to 
 be defiled, inasmuch as spiritual substance is liable to pollution no more 
 than is the sun." (Hutt. (234): "God, as the universal cause, affords 
 only this, viz., that you are able to act, but the fact that you act wick- 
 edly proceeds from a particular cause, viz., your perverse will.") 
 
 Holl. (443): " With the formal avojuia or ara^ia of actions morally evil, 
 God undoubtedly does not concur by any positive influence, because 
 wickedness is a defect and privation, not proceeding from God the Most 
 Perfect, in whom no defect can occur, but from a human will failing in 
 its action. But God concurs with the remote, not with the proximate ma- 
 terial of actions morally evil. The former is an indeterminate act ; the 
 latter is an act determinate and applied to a prohibited thing; e. g., when 
 Eve extended her hand to the forbidden fruit, two acts were present : 
 (1) the extension of the hand; (2) the extension applied to the forbidden 
 fruit. The former act is said to be the remote material ; the latter, the 
 proximate material. With the latter, God does not concur, because his 
 concurrence is general and' indeterminate ; and, therefore, the determi- 
 nation to this or that object is not from God as from the first and uni- 
 versal cause, but from the second and particular cause." With respect 
 to the concurrence of God with actions morally good, Holl. (443) dis- 
 tinguishes between the physical and moral concurrence. "Physically 
 (God) affords a general concurrence with moral actions, by sustaining 
 strength of mind and body, adapted to act. Morally, he concurs, by 
 commanding and promising." 
 
 [14] Holl. (443): " God concurs with the actions of creatures by 
 the immediateness of his power and being. He concurs by the imme- 
 diatencss of his being (immediatione suppositi}, because God, by his sub- 
 stance, is especially near to creatures operating, inasmuch as he fills 
 all in all. Jer. 23 : 24. He concurs, also, by the immediateness of his 
 power (immediatione virtutis), by his efficacious influence on the action 
 of the creature, and by immediately and proximately affecting the re- 
 
TIIE DIVINE GOVERNMENT. 195 
 
 suit, in that he ' worketh all in all.' 1 Cor. 12 : 6. A person is said to 
 act immediately, either exclusively or inclusively, Exclusively, when he 
 acts alone ; inclusively, when any one attains proximately an action and 
 result by the co-operation of others with him. God's immediate influ- 
 ence upon the actions of creatures is not exclusive ; as though creatures 
 were excluded from the action, or were inoperative ; but every creature 
 does its own part : but God, together with the creatures acting, affects 
 the action and result immediately and proximately by his own influence." 
 
 [15] Holl. (445): " Those who teach a previous concurrence, are 
 guilty of a contradiction with respect to what succeeds. For if God con- 
 cur, he does not precur ; if he co-operate, he does not pre-operate. A 
 premotion is an antecedent act ; but concurrence is not antecedent, but 
 occurs when the action itself is produced. If divine concurrence would 
 predetermine free agents to action, they would act necessarily, not 
 freely." 
 
 Quex. (I, 544): "Second causes or agents, whether natural or free, 
 have not, for the eliciting of an action, the need to be excited by a pre- 
 vious impulse, in the manner that a pick, a hammer, or an axe receives 
 a previous motion from the workman, inasmuch as they either have a 
 power for operating that is peculiar to themselves and innate, as fire, or 
 they are the power itself of action, as heat ; yea, if created things could 
 in no way exert themselves without that previous excitation, it would 
 follow that their will is excited also to vicious actions." 
 
 [16] Quex. (I, 533) : " Governing is an act of Divine Providence, 
 by which God symmetrically arranges each and every creature, in its 
 peculiar strength, actions, and suffering, to the glory of the Creator and 
 the good of this universe, and especially to the salvation of the godly." 
 
 [17] Calov. (Ill, 1196): "As preservation is most particularly 
 occupied with the essences, strength, and faculties of men, and of other 
 objects, especially those that are permanent, so governing is occupied 
 pre-eminently with the actions and sufferings of all men and things. 
 . . . But this governing is not only universal, but extends itself also 
 to individual actions, and moderates and directs them all. Pro v. 24: 
 12; Jer. 16: 9." 
 
 The difference between the Christian and the ante- Christian doctrine 
 of Providence is stated by Chmn. (Loc. Th., I, 129) as follows: "It is 
 well known of what nature the dogma of Epicurus was, who altogether 
 did away with Providence, viz., that God, who is supremely happy, is 
 not affected with the care of governing inferior things, because such an 
 occupation would interfere with his happiness, and would not be worthy 
 of his divine excellence. Therefore, he concedes that in second causes 
 
196 OF PBOVIDENCE. 
 
 there is a certain strength, according to which, when an application of 
 an agent to that which is passive occurs, an action and change ensue ; 
 but he denies that this action is controlled and governed by God. Yea, 
 he says that God does not care; but just as atoms floating in the sun 
 are turned about without order, and by chance, so that the same atom 
 which has been before in the upper part is now in the middle, and after- 
 while will be at the bottom, if the chance should so carry it. Thus 
 Epicurus imagines that second causes fluctuate, by chance and without 
 order, and that results are indeed produced from the application of suffi- 
 cient causes, but says that the application itself of the causes does not 
 occur by means of the government and control of God, but as the 
 chance may have happened." 
 
 The Christian doctrine of Providence, therefore, excludes every con- 
 ception of a blind necessity as well as of a mere chance. Holl. (437) : 
 "We are not to maintain a stoical fate, by which all things occur from 
 absolute and inevitable necessity; nor the more rigid astrological fate,* 
 by which even the free acts of the human will depend upon the influence 
 of the stars, and are determined thereby." But he nevertheless admits 
 "a Christian fate, which is the necessary connection of causes and 
 effects, of extrinsic necessity, in so far as it has been infallibly fore- 
 known by God, established by an absolute or conditionate decree, and 
 governed by divine direction agreeably disposing it." In Christian 
 fate there is therefore admitted a necessary connection of cause and 
 effect, but one of such a character that the influence of God upon the 
 effect that is to be produced is not thereby excluded. 
 
 (Id. 440) : " Fortune, which is an event by accident, accompanying 
 a result intended by self, of a cause acting freely, does not exist with 
 respect to the omniscient and most wise God (Wis. 14: 3), but only 
 with respect to ignorant man." 
 
 [18] Quen. (I, 533); "Permission is an act of governing Provi- 
 dence, by which God does not employ hinderances which no finite agent 
 can overcome, or knows how to overcome, to restrain rational creatures, 
 inclining themselves of their own accord to sin, from an evil forbidden 
 by the law, but, for just reasons, permits them to rush into sins, Ps. 81 : 
 12; Acts 14: 16; Rom. 1: 24, 28." Holl. (449): "Divine permis- 
 sion is not (1) kind indulgence, as though God clearly does not care 
 when men commit crimes; nor is it (2) a mitigation of the law, as if to 
 grant men license to sin ; nor (3) is it weakness in God, or a defect of 
 knowledge, as though he willed or approved evil, or a defect of power, 
 
 * [" Astrological fate is either the more rigid or the milder, . . . The milder is 
 that which occurs without impairing human liberty." (Holl., 443.) — Tr.] 
 
SPECIAL OBJECTS OF DIVINE PROVIDENCE. 197 
 
 as though he could not check sin ; nor (4) does it make God an uncon- 
 cerned witness of sins, who neither forbids sins, nor fixes a limit to 
 wickedness, nor restrains crimes by punishment. But it is (5) a nega- 
 tive act, consisting of the denial or suspension of an insuperable hind- 
 rance. God, indeed, could check or restrain the sinner by means of the 
 interposition of a forcible or insuperable obstacle ; but the most holy 
 Divinity has the very best reasons for permitting sin Meanwhile 
 (God), by a legal impediment, restrains the will of man sinning, and 
 continually invites the sinner to repentance by exhibiting rewards and 
 penalties." Also the following discriminations. Quen. (I, 533) : 
 " God indeed permits, but he does not will, that which is permitted, 
 which occurs not, indeed, while God absolutely wills that it should not 
 be ; i. e., while he restrains and hinders, yet, nevertheless, while he 
 does not will it, Ps. 5 : 4 ; 1 John 3 : 8. God's not hindering is not 
 willing, but is his permitting, and, at the same time, also, his being 
 averse to, those things which he permits, in so far as they seriously dis- 
 please him." Grh. (IV, 88) : " God does not will sin, and yet does 
 not prevent it, which is permission. But, although he may permit sin 
 willingly and not reluctantly, nevertheless his permission and his will 
 have respect to diverse objects ; the permission is occupied with the sin 
 itself, but the will with the useful end, which God, in his wisdom, 
 knows how to bring forth from it." 
 
 [19] Quen. (I, 534): "Hindrance is an act of governing Providence, 
 by which God limits the action of creatures according to his judgment, 
 so that they do not produce the result, which otherwise they would effect, 
 either by a natural or a free power to act." 
 
 [20] Quen. (I, 534): " Direction is an act of governing Providence, 
 by which God so regulates the good actions of creatures, that they tend 
 and are led to the object intended by God (Acts 4 : 28), but directs the 
 evil actions to a certain end prescribed by himself, yet not considered 
 by those who sin, and frequently contrary to their intention. Thus 1 
 Sam. 9:17; 10:21; Gen. 37 : 7 ; 50 : 20." 
 
 [21] Quen. (I, 534): "Determination is an act of governing Provi- 
 dence, by which God has appointed to the strength, actions, and suffer- 
 ings of creatures, certain limits within which they are restrained, both 
 with respect to time and with respect to greatness and degree, Job 1 : 
 12; 2:6; Ps. 124: 2." 
 
 [22] Chmn. (Loc. Th., I, 127): "Although the Providence of God 
 extends to all creatures, yet it has its grades. For it is especially in- 
 trusted with the government of the human race, 1 Cor. 9:9; Matt. 10 : 
 31 ; Rom. 8 : 20. In the second place, although the Providence of God 
 
198 OF PROVIDENCE. 
 
 maketh the sun to rise, and sendeth rain upon the just and unjust, nev- 
 ertheless there is a peculiar and preeminent relation of a special Provi- 
 dence towards those who are members of the Church, 1 Tim. 4 : 10 ; 
 Ps. S3: 13, 18, 19; 100: 3." 
 
 Br. (308): "Divine Providence has also, with respect to the acts 
 towards which it is directed, its own grades, and, above other creatures, 
 relates to men, but, in the human race, especially to believers, Rom. 8 ; 
 28." Hence the division "into general and special Providence. The 
 former is that by which God preserves and governs the entire earth, and 
 whatever is contained in its circuit. The latter is that by which God 
 most kindly regards, most tenderly cherishes, and most agreeably rules 
 both the Church militant or the assembly of believing men, and the 
 Church triumphant or the choir of angels and elect men." Holl. 
 (448). 
 
 Quen. (I, 529) distinguishes between the general and the special ob- 
 ject. The general object consists of all things in general which exist, 
 Heb. 1:3; Wis. 8 : 1 ; 12 : 13, 15. The special object is partly primary, 
 and partly secondary. The, primary object consists of angels and men, 
 and, indeed, all of these in general, Acts 17: 28; Matt. 5: 45. (p. 530.) 
 Its object, in the most special sense, consists of godly and believing men, 
 Deut. 32: 9; Ps. 4 : 3 ; 33: 18; 37: 18, 25; 73 : 24 ; 77 : 20; 91 : 11 ; 
 Heb. 1:14; Matt. 10 : 31. All other created things, without even the 
 least exception, are secondary objects, Deut. 25 : 4 ; 1 Cor. 9:9; Job 
 39:1; Ps. 147:9; Prov. 6 : 8 ; Matt. 6 : 30 ; 8 : 31 ; 10: 29, 30 ; 
 Luke 12: 6. 
 
 As man is the centre of the entire creation, and thus also of Divine 
 Providence, the Dogmaticians discuss at length the relation in which 
 Providence stands to the origin, the progress, and the end of human 
 life. 
 
 Quen. (I, 529): "God controls the life of men partly in its entrance, 
 by forming and preserving men in the maternal womb (Job 10 : 3, 8, 9, 
 10, 11, 12 ; Ps. 139 : 13, 15, 16 ; Acts 17 : 25), and by bringing them 
 forth from the womb (Job 10 : 18 ; Ps. 22 : 9, 10 ; 71 : 6); partly in its 
 progress (Deut. 30 : 20 ; Job 10 : 12 ; Ps. 56:8; 37 : 23, 24 ; Job 34 : 
 21 ; Prov. 16 : 3 ; 21 : 1 ; Ps. 139 : 2 ; Matt. 6 : 25 ; 10 : 30); partly 
 in its termination (Job 14: 5), so that the appointed course of life is 
 either attained (Gen. 47 : 29 ; 2 Sam. 7 : 12), or shortened (Ps. 55 : 23), 
 or prolonged (Is. 38 : 5), or doubled (1 Kings 17 : 22 ; 2 Kings 13 : 21 ; 
 Matt. 9 :25 ; Luke 7:15; John 11 : 44 ; Acts 9 : 40 ; 20 : 12)." 
 
 Concerning (1) Holl. (427): %t The entrance of human life embraces 
 both its formation and preservation in the womb of the mother, and its 
 
HUMAN LIFE PROVIDENTIALLY CONTROLLED. 199 
 
 being brought from the womb." Thereupon Br. remarks (309): "For 
 this reason it is correctly stated that God has respect not only to the 
 universal, but also to the particular cause,, and supplies the defect of 
 second causes, or, at least, directs and governs them in acting. This, 
 indeed, some explain so as to affirm, on the one hand, that when the 
 wonderful variety, and connection, and structure of the members of the 
 body are considered, an efficient particular cause acting with knowl- 
 edge is required; and, therefore, that another and more sublime virtue 
 than that which is in the seed (commonly called dvvafiig •kTmgtlk^), and 
 which cannot be conceived of unless as belonging to God himself, con- 
 curs with a special influence. On the other hand, also, when the im- 
 materiality of the soul is considered, and the fact, therefore, that it must 
 be produced independently of the subject, or from nothing; and that 
 such a production demands an infinite power of action, and is, therefore, 
 peculiar to God alone ; they infer that, for the production of the human 
 soul, God affords a special and determinate influence. But others, al- 
 though they believe that the human body and soul are alike produced 
 by the parents themselves as second causes, with the concurrence of 
 God as the universal cause, nevertheless regard the acts of protection 
 afforded in the production and the birth of man, against various calam- 
 ities and dangers, as many eminent proofs of peculiar divine care and 
 favor; in addition to universal, they ascribe to God also a special or 
 particular concurrence, and refer thither the passage, Job 10: 8-11." 
 
 Concerning (2) Holl. (427): " God controls the progress of life, by 
 granting the means of supporting life, Ps. 145: 16; directing our steps, 
 i. e., by leading our designs, which have been begun and performed, to 
 their desired results, Ps. 37 : 23 ; by bringing to 'nought the snares or 
 repelling the open violence of enemies, Ps. 3: 7, 8; by fitting and call- 
 ing us to a certain mode of life, Jer. 1 : 5—7." 
 
 Concerning (3) Br. (312): "Divine Providence respects the termi- 
 nation of human life, not only so far as by a common law there is given 
 to every one his own constitution, by virtue of which he can, with the 
 general concurrence of God, attain a certain space of life (the natural 
 limit of life, Ps. 90: 10); but also as to some men life is prolonged be- 
 yond that boundary (2 Kings 20: 1, 6) to which they would come by 
 the strength of nature: others the end of life threatens sooner (Ps. 55: 
 23; 102 : 24) than it should according to the course of nature (terminus 
 abbreviabilisy (Id. 313): "Divine Providence, moreover, changes 
 the natural limit of human life (the preternatural or hyperphysical limit 
 of life), both with respect to the godly (the limit of grace), and with 
 respect to wicked men (the limit of wrath)." (Id. 314): "To the 
 
200 OF PROVIDENCE. 
 
 godly God prolongs life, either as a reward of their obedience (Ex. 20: 
 12; Prov. 3 : 1, 2 ; 4 : 10), or for the public good (2 Cor. 1:8; Phil. 
 2 : 27, 30). To the same he shortens life, partly to prevent them from 
 being corrupted by the wicked examples of others (Wis. 4: 10, 11), 
 partly that they may not see the coming evils, and be distressed (2 
 Chron. 34 : 28 ; Is. 26 : 20 ; 57 : 2)." " God, by a just judgment pre- 
 maturely breaks the thread of life of the wicked, when he either himself 
 sends deadly disease or death upon them (Deut. 28 : 21, 22 ; Gen. 38 : 
 7, 10 ; 1 Sam. 25 : 38 ; Jer. 28 : 15, 16), or gives the command to in- 
 flict death (Gen. 9:6; Ex. 21 : 12, 14 ; 22 : 18 ; Lev. 18 and 20), or 
 suffers them to contract disease or violent death by intemperance (2 
 Kings 8 : 15), or other crimes (2 Sam. 18 : 14; 17 : 23)." (Id. 315) : 
 "And thus it is also evident, that it is not absolutely necessary that 
 every man should die at that very time, and by that kind of death by 
 which he does die ; or in other words, that this has not been absolutely 
 and immutably decreed by God, apart from or previous to any regard 
 to causes or circumstances to be found outside of God. For, otherwise, 
 the prayers and vows of the godly, and divine promises and threatenings, 
 would be vain. The hyperphysical or divine limit is always hypothet- 
 ical, including the condition of piety or impiety, or of the contempt of 
 means." 
 
 [23] Chmn. (Loc. Th., I, 128) : " That God has not been bound to 
 second causes in such a manner as to do nothing else, than as second 
 causes excite him, but that, beyond the customary order of second causes, 
 and contrary to the common course of nature, he wills and is able to aid 
 the Church, and to punish the wicked, so as either to hinder, change, 
 mitigate, or intensify second causes." 
 
 Quen. (I, 535) : " Providence is extraordinary when God operates 
 either without means, or beyond or above means, or contrary to means 
 and their nature, or, what is the same, above and beyond the order in- 
 stituted by himself, v. gr., Ex. 34 : 28 ; 1 Kings 19:8; Is. 38 : 8 ; 2 
 Kings 6 : 6, etc. (all miracles are effects of the extraordinary providence 
 of God). Providence is ordinary where God carries on his works 
 through ordinary means, viz., through the established and accustomed 
 course of nature." 
 
 [24] Holl. (448) : " Providence with reference to good, is that which, 
 by preservation maintains, by co-operation promotes, and by governing 
 directs the good of creatures to the praise of the divine glory. Provi- 
 dence with reference to evil, is that by which God is occupied with moral 
 evil, not as an indifferent observer, but as the most just Judge, and, 
 therefore, by acts preceding, attending, and following sin, exercises 
 
THE DOCTRINE SUMMARILY STATED. 201 
 
 justice tempered by grace." In the discrimination here made, the dif- 
 ferent relation in which God stands to the good and the evil is ex- 
 plained essentially in the same manner as in the doctrine of the divine 
 government (comp. notes 18-21). The difference consists only in this, 
 that here the more general conception of Providence is assumed, which 
 embraces both government and preservation. 
 
 As acts of Providence preceding sin, Holl. (448-450) has enumer- 
 ated : "Foresight, aversion to the sin foreseen, and hindering." As 
 acts attending : " Support of the nature acting wickedly, concurrence 
 with the remote material of a vicious action, permission of the arafia 
 adhering to the sinful action, limiting determination of the sin, direc- 
 tion to a good end." As acts following : "Imposing of the divine pen- 
 alties, Is. 34: 8, remission of sins." 
 
 [25] Chmn. (Loc. Th., I, 125) : " Providence is a general action of 
 God, by which he is present with his creature, sustaining and preserving 
 it, as long as he wishes it to be preserved, and preserves the order of his 
 work appointed by himself, not by any fatal necessity, but as a most free 
 agent ; so that, for the sake of men, he controls all things, and moder- 
 ates, changes, and hinders many with respect to second causes." 
 
 Grh. (IV, 136) thus summarily states the whole doctrine of Provi- 
 dence : " The action of Divine Providence is either eternal, viz., irpoyvucng 
 nal -xpSdeoiQ, or of time, viz., the preservation and governing of things 
 created; and this, too, either ordinary through means; or extraordinary, 
 without means, or contrary to means. Both are occupied with all things, 
 especially with human nature, in the preservation and governing of 
 which the life and actions of men come forth. Either the entrance, or 
 the progress, or the termination of life, is regarded. Some actions are 
 good, and that, too, either civilly or spiritually ; others are evil ; and 
 how the action of Divine Providence concurs in all these, we have ex- 
 plained by certain aphorisms." 
 14 
 
202 OF ANGELS. 
 
 CHAPTEE V. 
 
 Of Angels * 
 
 § 22. When were they Created f 
 
 /CERTAINTY in regard to the existence of angels we attain 
 ^-^ only through revelation, for reason can at best make their 
 existence only possible or probable. [1] They are, indeed, not 
 referred to in the history of the creation ; nevertheless we know 
 that they are beings created by God, and we have reason to be- 
 lieve that they were not created before, nor after, but within the 
 six days of creation ; yet we know nothing further as to the day 
 upon which they were created. [2] 
 
 The Holy Scriptures furnish us with more specific information, 
 both in regard to the nature of the angels and their moral con- 
 dition. 
 
 I. The Natuee of Angels. 
 
 The Holy Scriptures represent the angels as, indeed, finite, be- 
 cause created, but intelligent and spiritual, therefore incorporeal 
 beings, which, without needing a body, nevertheless have a per- 
 sonal subsistence. (Quen. I, 444): " The angels are spiritual 
 substances (Ps. 104: 4 ; Heb. 1 : 14), i. e., without any bodily form 
 (whether gross or refined), finite, complete, and thus real persons 
 [hypostases], [3] Angels are, further, intelligent substances, and 
 
 *The doctrinal writers differ from one another in assigning a place for this topic. 
 Some, as Quen. and Holl., place it next in order to that of Creation, others to that 
 of Providence. Cal. (IV, 2) thus expresses himself in regard to the place which 
 should be assigned to it : " The discussion concerning angels may be presented 
 either in connection with the works of creation, as is commonly done, when it 
 prefaces the doctrine of Divine Providence ; or, it may be presented in connection 
 with the topie of Divine Providence, inasmuch as this embraces also the angels, 
 and besides, employs them, as its ministers, in the government of men, both to bless and to 
 punish them. The latter place seems the more appropriate ; since, under the head of 
 the creation by God, one cannot so suitably treat of the apostasy of angels, or of 
 the establishment of the good angels in truth and concreated holiness : these mat- 
 ters more appropriately belong to the topic concerning the Providence of God." 
 
THE MORAL CONDITION OF ANGELS. 203 
 
 very capable of becoming well acquainted both with themselves and. 
 with other things." They were originally created by God in 
 order to promote his glory and to serve him. [4] 
 
 From this description of their nature, and of the design of their 
 creation, as given in the Holy Scriptures, there follows the series 
 of attributes which we are to ascribe to them, and whereby we 
 become better acquainted with their nature. [5] 
 
 From the nature of angels as spiritual beings, there follow : 
 
 1. The attributes of indivisibility, invisibility, immutability, im,- 
 rnortality, eternal duration, illocality, definitive ubiety, and agility. 
 For purely spiritual beings can neither be divisible nor visible 
 (indivisibilita-s — invisibiliias) ; [6] not physically changeable, tor 
 only that which is material is subject to such a physical altera- 
 tion and development {immutabilitas) : [7] not mortal, for only 
 that which is corporeal is perishable ; they, however, in duration 
 are imperishable {immortalitas — duratio seviteriia.) [8] Further, 
 they are not present at any particular place in such a manner as 
 to occupy there a portion of space; and yet they are not every- 
 where present as God is, but are always present only at one par- 
 ticular place, yet in such a manner that they can be at any place 
 they may choose, even the smallest, because they have no body 
 that can occupy space (illocalitas — ubietas definitivd). [9] Fi- 
 nally, as they are not restricted in their movements by space and 
 time, they can move with amazing celerity (agililas). [10] 
 
 2. As intelligent beings the angels possess the attributes of 
 knowledge and freedom of the will, and, in view of the service 
 for which they are designed, the attribute of power. God has 
 therefore bestowed upon them reason, [11] and free will, [12] and 
 great, though not unlimited, might and power. [13] 
 
 II. The Moral Condition of the Angels. 
 
 The Holy Scriptures divide angels into good and evil; it as- 
 sumes thus a difference in their moral condition. This could 
 not, however, have existed from the beginning; for, as every- 
 thing that at the creation proceeded from the hand of God was 
 good, the angels must have been good also ; at that time, there- 
 fore, we must assume that the moral condition of all of them was 
 equally good. The difference in this respect must have arisen 
 
204 OF ANGELS. 
 
 subsequently. We must distinguish, therefore, the origiDal con- 
 dition and that which was consequent upon this {status oriyinalis 
 et oriyinalem secutus). 
 
 The original condition was one in which all the angels were 
 equally good, righteous, and holy, endowed by God with wisdom 
 and with the ability perfectly to perform the will of God, [14] yet 
 with such freedom of the will, also, that the possibility of diso- 
 bedience towards God and of apostasy was not excluded. [15] 
 With these gracious gifts the angels were endowed by God, in 
 order that by the proper use of the same, they might attain to the 
 end for which they were created, namely, the beatific sight and 
 enjoyment of God ; the original condition is therefore called 
 the state of grace. [16~] As, however, some of the angels made a 
 bad use of the liberty that had been granted to them, the origi- 
 nal condition ceased, and there arose that difference of moral 
 condition, in consequence of which the angels became divided 
 into two classes, the good and the evil, the former entering into 
 the state of glory, and the latter into the state of misery. [17] 
 
 A. THE GOOD ANGELS. 
 
 From the time when the angels separated into two classes, a 
 change took place also in those who did not become disobedient 
 towards God. For, because they remained faithful to God and 
 true to that which is good, they have, as a reward for this, been 
 so confirmed in that which is good that they can no longer be in 
 danger of falling, and that even the possibility of their sinning no 
 longer exists. Br. (267) : "Those are called good (angels) who 
 have persevered in the goodness or righteousness and holiness in 
 which they were created, and have been confirmed by God in that 
 which is good, as a gracious reward for their obedience, so that they 
 can no longer lose this goodness, or sin, or become evilP [18] Thus 
 the good angels have, at the same time, reached the goal for 
 which they were originally created by God, for they have at- 
 tained to the enjoyment of beholding God, and so have entered 
 upon the state of glory. [19] The enlargement of all the powers 
 originally bestowed upon them is merely a consequence of this 
 condition. [20] If they were wise before (in the state of grace), 
 they are now still more so, because they now see God ; [21] if 
 
THE EVIL ANGELS. 205 
 
 they were "holy before, they are now still more so, in such a sense 
 that there is not now even a possibility of their sinning. Their 
 liberty is, however, not hereby lessened, but increased, for they 
 do right not by compulsion, but from an inner free impulse. [22] 
 And so too their power has been magnified, for they are now able 
 to overcome the evil angels who were formerly as mighty as 
 they. [23] 
 
 The employment of good angels consists (a) in worshipping 
 God. and (b) serving him in the world by protecting and watch- 
 ing over the pious, as well as by punishing and restraining the 
 wicked. Qtjen. (I, 450): "The duties and works of the good 
 angels are to worship and praise God, Ps. 103: 20; 148: 2; Is. 
 6: 3; and to execute his commands, Dan. 7: 10; as well by pun- 
 ishing the wicked, Gen. 19 : 13 ; 2 Kings 19 : 35 ; as by guarding 
 and protecting the godly, Ps. 34: 7; 91: 11, 12; Heb. 1: 14." [24] 
 
 For these services, which they render to men, they deserve our 
 gratitude, but every species of worship or adoration addressed to 
 them is wicked and superstitious. [25] 
 
 The Scriptures give us some intimation of a diversity of rank 
 among the angels, without, however, giving any specific informa- 
 tion on the subject. [26] 
 
 B. THE EVIL ANGELS. 
 
 They are thus designated on account of their disobedience to- 
 ward God, and the evil disposition remaining in them since the 
 fall. [27] Holl. (396) : " The evil angels are those who did not per- 
 severe in concreated wisdom and righteousness, but of their own 
 free will turned away from God and the rule of right, and became 
 the perpetual enemies of God and men, to be plagued with eter- 
 nal torments." In what this disobedience toward God consisted, 
 cannot with certainty be learned from the Scriptures, but it is 
 highly probable that pride was the sin through which they fell 
 away from God. [28] The cause for this sin lay entirely in their 
 will, with which they of their own accord turned away from God, 
 and it was in no sense owing to any outward necessity or any de- 
 fect in their nature. [29] How many of them thus apostatized 
 from God, at what time, and whether all at once? Concerning 
 all this we have no certain information in the Scriptures, and 
 
206 OF ANGELS. 
 
 know only this, that their apostasy preceded the fall of man, and 
 tli at one evil angel stands at their head, as their leader and 
 chief. [30] 
 
 As, however, the obedience of the good angels was followed 
 by a reward, so the fall of the wicked angels was followed by 
 a punishment on the part of God, namely this, that those who 
 once apostatized from God remained forever rejected by him, 
 and accordingly have been transferred from the state of grace, in 
 which they hitherto stood, into a condition of the greatest misery 
 (status rniseride); but they have to expect still heavier punish- 
 ments at the judgment day. [31] 
 
 And as, in the case of the good angels, their transfer into the 
 state of glory was followed by an enlargement of the powers 
 originally conferred upon them, so the transfer of the wicked an- 
 gels was likewise followed by a diminution of the powers origi- 
 nally conferred. They retain, indeed, those gifts and powers 
 that are inseparable from their nature, but their knowledge is no 
 longer, as in the state of grace, a source of blessing, but greatly 
 obscured, and hence they think perversely about God and divine 
 things. [32] 
 
 But the wicked angels make it their work to detract to the 
 utmost from the glory of God and to hinder men in their at- 
 tempts to secure their temporal and eternal welfare. [33] Yet 
 they cannot, even in this way, with all their malice, entirely 
 avoid serving God, for he makes use of them to punish the 
 wicked and to chasten the godly for their own good. [34] 
 
 Definition. — Quen. (I, 455): "Angels are finite spirits, com- 
 plete, intelligent, endowed with great power and originally cre- 
 ated by God in righteousness and holiness, for the glory of God 
 and the service of man ; of whom some by their own free will 
 fell from their Creator and from concreated perfection, and were 
 consequently deprived not only of the favor and felicity which 
 they had, but also of the beatific vision of God which they might 
 have been able to enjoy, and were cast into infernal fire for per- 
 petual torment without any hope of pardon. The rest, however, 
 continued in their original condition, and were so established by 
 God in that which is good that they neither wish nor are able 
 ever to lose it or fall away from it, and are enjoying God eter- 
 nally." 
 
 ( 
 
WHEN WERE THE ANGELS CREATED? 207 
 
 [1] Quen. (I, 443) : "That angels really exist is taught both by ex- 
 press declarations of Scripture, Ps. 104: 4; Heb. 1: 14, and by the 
 description of various apparitions, Gen. 18: 2; 19: 1, seq. The 
 existence of angels is demonstrated, not so much by probable argu- 
 ments derived from philosophy, whether by the gradation of existences 
 and the link needed for the completion of the universe (because there 
 are creatures (1) merely corporeal, such as stars, stones, etc.; (2) partly 
 corporeal and partly spiritual, as man ; (3) purely spiritual, as angels), 
 or by human testimony, or by various experiences, as by an indisput- 
 able argument, namely, the clear and oft-repeated assertion of the 
 Scriptures." 
 
 Br. (251) : " It is scarcely possible that the existence of angels can 
 be clearly demonstrated from the light of nature, although probable 
 reasons may be assigned for it." 
 
 As to the meaning of the word, Quen. (I, 442) : " The name angel 
 does not describe the nature of the being, but its office, and signifies 
 one sent, a legate, a messenger. Hence Augustine : ' Do you ask for 
 the name of their nature ? . It is spirit. Do you inquire concerning the 
 name of their office ? It is angel.' The word angel etymologically 
 signifies messenger. But by the universally received usage and style of 
 Scripture language it designates a nature and a specific creature." Yet 
 because the word is originally nothing more than a designation of office, 
 it is used in the Scriptures with reference also to the Son of God, as the 
 uncreated angel. Is. 63 : 9 ; Mai. 3:1; Gen. 48: 16, seq. Also 
 with reference to men, Mai. 2:7; Rev. 1 : 20 ; Mai. 3:1; Mark 1 : 
 2; Matt, 11: 10; Luke 7: 27. 
 
 [2] Chmn. (Loc. Th., I, 122): " Since Moses does not describe the 
 creation of angels, many curious inquiries have arisen, as, e. g., when 
 were they created ? . . . But, as the Scriptures do not state the precise 
 time and day of the creation of angels, we gladly remain in ignorance . 
 of that which we neither can nor ought to know. It is enough, there- 
 
 © © ' 
 
 fore, for us to know (1) that the angels did not come into existence of 
 their own accord, nor were begotten from the substance of God, but 
 were created; (2) that the angels did not exist from eternity, nor in- 
 deed before that befrinninof when all things which are in heaven and 
 
 © D © 
 
 earth, visible and invisible, began to be. For to have been in the be- 
 ginning can be said of him alone through whom all things were made, 
 and who is eternal. John 1 : 1-3." 
 
 Quen. (I, 459) : "The angels were created by God (Col. 1 : 16 ; 
 Ps. 104 : 4; 103 : 20) in time, along with this visible world, or within 
 the period of the original six days ; but on what day or at what time 
 
208 OF ANGELS. 
 
 they were produced, we confess that we are willingly ignorant." The 
 proof is thus stated by Br. (252) : " They were not created before the 
 heavens and the earth, for these were created in the beginning, and so 
 were the first among all created things; see Gen. 1:1. And besides it 
 is well known that the eternity of God is described by his existing be- 
 fore the foundation of the world. See Ps. 90 : 2 ; Is. 48: 13. More- 
 over, they were created not after but within the six days, for after that 
 interval God rested from the ordinary work of creation. That the 
 angels were created before man is usually proved from Job 38 : 7. And 
 some believe that we are to understand also from this passage that the 
 angels were created upon the first day ; namely, because when God 
 founded the earth then the angels are said to have praised God. But 
 these matters are not altogether clear ; although we do not deny that 
 the angels are intended by the term ' sons of God ' in chapter 1, v. 6, 
 and we say that their beginning was contemporaneous with the origin of 
 other creatures. Perhaps, also, as we know that man was created after 
 the other creatures that were intended for his advantage, so also it may 
 be correctly inferred that the angels who were to minister unto man 
 (according to Heb. 1 : 14) were created before man. Yet it is not 
 necessary that w r e understand the angels to be intended by the terms 
 heaven or light, in Gen. 1, metaphorically interpreted.'"' 
 
 [3] The angels are called "complete substances, or substances sub- 
 sisting per se," because they do not need a body in order that in con- 
 junction with it they may constitute a person. Holl. (378) : " The 
 human soul is an incomplete spirit, designed in itself and by its very 
 nature to enter into the composition of an entire man. Hence also a 
 separated soul has a natural propensity and inclination towards a body, 
 with which as a component part it constitutes a complete man; but 
 angels are not naturally designed to constitute a unit in themselves, 
 along with a component part, but they have an essence terminating in 
 itself. "Wherefore the soul is an incomplete spirit, and angels are com- 
 plete spirits." Thus the following distinction can be made between 
 angels and men, that the former are complete spirits and the latter in- 
 complete spirits ; while the difference between God and the angels is, 
 that he is an uncreated and infinite spirit, while they are created and 
 finite spirits. Br. (254) : " As the angels have a spiritual essence in 
 common with God and the human soul, so they differ from God in that 
 their essence is not infinite, but finite, and from the soul of man in that 
 their substance is complete." 
 
 The proof that angels are complete substances is drawn by Qoen. 
 (I, 444): *' (1) From their names, for they are called guardians, Dan. 
 
ATTRIBUTES OF THE ANGELS. 209 
 
 6 : 22 ; principalities, powers, Col. 1 : 16 ; gods, Ps. 82 : 6 ; sons of 
 God, Job 2:1; men of God, Judges 13 : 6. (2) From their personal 
 actions, such as to minister, to stand before the Lord, to appear, to 
 speak, etc., which surely cannot be attributed to the inspired move- 
 ments of men or the mere actions of God. (3) From the fall or ruin 
 of some angels, and the perseverance of the good ones in the truth. (4) 
 From what is ascribed to them, viz., knowledge, desire, power." This 
 proof is regarded by the Dogmaticians as highly important, over against 
 those who deny the personality of the angels. Quen. (I, 444): "This 
 ground is to be held against the Sadducees of old, who thought that 
 angels were certain movements or affections excited in men ; also against 
 the Anabaptists, who foolishly imagined that angels were merely the 
 actions of God, punishing crimes or rewarding good deeds; also against 
 David George, the heresiarch of the last century, who confounded angels 
 with the thoughts of the human mind." 
 
 [4] Cal. (IV, 23): " The purpose for which angels were created was, 
 with respect to God, his praise and the execution of the divine will 
 (Job 38 : 7; Ps. 103: 20; 104: 4); with respect to themselves, the 
 eternal enjoyment of God ; with respect to man, service, for which they 
 were specially and divinely destined ; inasmuch as God created all 
 things for man, and made the angels his servants, Ps. 104, in order to 
 use their ministry especially, for man and his salvation. Heb. 1 : 14." 
 
 [5] The most of the Dogmaticians divide the attributes of angels into 
 negative and affirmative. As the former class they enumerate indivisi- 
 bility, invisibility, immutability, immortality, illocality. As the latter, 
 knowledge, freedom of the will, power, eternal duration, definitive ubiety, 
 agility. Instead of following this merely external method of arrangement, 
 we prefer treating these attributes, after the example of Cal., Br., and 
 others, in the order corresponding to the nature of angels ; but we 
 enumerate them, nevertheless, after Quen. and Hole., as they are less 
 extensively treated by Cal. and Br. 
 
 [6] Quen. (I, 445): "The indivisibility of an angelic substance is 
 owning to its incorporeity or immateriality, for what is not made of mat- 
 ter, is no quantity, nor has it parts outside of parts, and consequently is 
 not divisible into quantitative parts." 
 
 Id. (I, 446): "Invisibility is a consequence of spirituality ; for a spirit 
 cannot be seen by bodily eyes, hence also the angels are enumerated 
 among invisible beings (aopara). Col. 1 : 16." 
 
 [7] The immutability of angels is restricted, as one that is not such 
 absolutely, but comparatively and relatively. Holl. (382): "God 
 alone is absolutely immutable, the angels are immutable only relatively ; 
 
210 OF ANGELS. 
 
 because they are not subject to physical mutations, which are peculiar to 
 natural bodies. For the angels clo not beget, nor are they begotten ; 
 they are neither increased nor diminished ; they neither grow old, nor 
 decay ; nor do they proceed upon foot from one place to another. Yet 
 they are not beyond the reach of every kind of change, for they vary 
 the where of their presence (suum ubi), they rejoice, are sad, love, or 
 hate ; these are moral changes" 
 
 [8] («) When immortality is ascribed to angels, this is intended to 
 express that there is nothing in them, as incorporeal beings, who for 
 this reason are not subject to change or decay, that could occasion their 
 death ; but it is not meant thereby to deny that God has power over 
 their life also. 
 
 Cal. (IV, 24): "Although they may be remanded again into nothing 
 by God, through his absolute power, by whom they were created from 
 nothing, and may thus be called corruptible, as God alone is incorrup- 
 tible, and he alone has immortality, 1 Tim. 6: 16; yet they are free 
 from physical corruption, nor have they any internal principle of cor- 
 ruption, because they are altogether destitute of matter, and so by na- 
 ture are incorruptible and immortal." Holl. expresses this by means 
 of the distinction between incorruptibility in a physical and in a metaphy- 
 sical sense: "Inwardly (ab intra'), they are physically incorruptible, 
 because they have not in themselves an internal principle of change or 
 corruption, which is matter. Nor has any physical body such power 
 as to corrupt a spirit or an angel outwardly (ab extra). But if corrupti- 
 ble be used in a metaphysical sense, of something that can be reduced to 
 nothing by absolute divine power, then the angels are corruptible, be- 
 cause if God would so command they could return to the nothing from 
 which they arose." Wherefore, other Dogmaticians suggest, instead of 
 the term corruptibility, the expression annihilability. Further, the an- 
 gels do not possess the principle of immortality of themselves, but it has 
 been graciously given to them by God; whence Holl. (382) thus fur- 
 ther distinguishes: " The angels are immortal and incorruptible not in- 
 dependently, originally, and in consequence of an eternal essence, for 
 thus God alone is immortal ; but they are immortal dependency, parti- 
 cipatively, and through the grace of God, who creates and preserves 
 them." 
 
 (b) Quen. (I, 446) : " landless duration is attributed to angels, as the 
 mean between eternity and time. Eternity is that which belongs to 
 God alone, and is without beginning or end. Time, which belongs to 
 corporeal creatures, has both beginning and end. But endless duration 
 has a beginning, yet is without end." Cal. (IV, 28) : " The created 
 
ATTRIEUTES OF THE ANGELS. 211 
 
 duration of things indestructible in their nature is distinguished from 
 time, and is called endless duration [sempiternity] (<zvun%) by philoso- 
 phers." Endless duration then practically expresses no more than 
 immortality ; the difference seems to consist only in this, that the same 
 conception, viz., that of continuing forever, is deduced in the one case 
 by the negation of matter, and in the other by the negation of time ; the 
 angels are immortal, for they have no matter which is subject to change 
 or decay; they are imperishable as to their duration, for their existence 
 is not measured by time. 
 
 [9] The angels, as incorporeal beings, occupy no space, and hence 
 are illocal. Quex. (I, 446) : " The angels are not in a place by cir- 
 cumscription, as natural bodies, because they are spirits, but they rather 
 coexist with a corporeal place or with a body." Yet they are not omni- 
 present, but always present only at a particular place. This latter idea 
 is expressed by the attribute of alicubitas {being somewhere). Quen. 
 (I, 446) : "There is attributed to them -xov or obi (a somewhere), in 
 which an angel definitively is. For angels are in a certain space by 
 designation, or definitively, i. e., their substantial, not merely virtual, 
 presence is limited (definitur) in a certain space, so that they are there, 
 and not in other spaces, and much less everywhere ; and, because an angel 
 is devoid of parts, the whole angel is not only in the whole place, but 
 the whole angel can exist in every part of the place, even the very 
 least, yea, in a point." The manner in which the being somewhere 
 (das Irgendwoseiii) is predicated of angels, of God, or of physical bodies, 
 is described by the following distinctions : Of the angels, it is said that 
 "they are somewhere definitively (in nbi definitivo), since they at their 
 own pleasure limit a certain space for themselves, in the whole of which 
 they wholly are, and wholly in each part of the space, because their 
 essence is indivisible." Of God, it is said that "he is somewhere re~ 
 ple'ively (in ubi repletivo), since he fills all in all." Of physical bodies, 
 it is said that " they are somewhere circumscriptively or occvpatively (in 
 ubi circumscriptivo seu occupativo), because they occupy a space com- 
 mensurate with themselves, and are circumscribed by the surrounding 
 air." Holl. (384) : " But the angels are not somewhere repletively, be- 
 cause they are not everywhere, like God ; nor are they someivhere 
 occupatively, since they do not occupy a space commensurate with the 
 peculiarity of their spiritual nature. For measure depends upon quan- 
 tity, and an angel is devoid of that." 
 
 [10] Holl. (384) : " Wonderful is the agility and velocity of angels, 
 so that without local motion, which is a quality of bodies, and thus also 
 without a succession of parts, which they do not have, they are able to 
 
212 OF ANGELS. 
 
 change the where of their presence with extreme celerity. Yet it does 
 not appear that angels are entirely devoid of motion, since they are 
 sometimes here and sometimes elsewhere. And, although the' motion 
 of angels is extremely rapid, yet it is not instantaneous, because space, 
 in which they move, is extended and continuous, and cannot be traversed 
 by any creature in an instant." 
 
 [11] " That the knowledge of angels is great and superior to that of 
 all men, because joined with the knowledge of the Son of God; and yet 
 that it is not infinite, since they are ignorant of the day of judgment," 
 is deduced from 2 Sam. 14 : 20 ; Mark 13 : 32. In imitation of the 
 Scholastics, some of the Dogmaticians attempt more particularly to de- 
 scribe the kind and the measure of the knowledge possessed by the 
 angels. Tims Quen. (I, 445) : " The angels do not know all things at 
 once by one intellection, but as distinct and through different concep- 
 tions, not merely by a simple apprehension, but also by synthesis and 
 analysis, and also by reasoning and inferring one thing from another. 
 They know God, but they do not comprehend him, because of the infinity 
 of the divine essence, and the finitude of the angelic intellect." (Br. 
 (255, 256): "They know God only abstractively, i. e., a posteriori, 
 and from created things ; yet more perfectly than our abstractive knowl- 
 edge.) " They know the thoughts of men, not a priori and distinctly, 
 but a posteriori and confusedly, by signs, effects, and mental conditions. 
 As to future contingencies, they can infer future events by the consid- 
 eration of causes, and this with the greatest quickness, yet only with 
 probability and in the main." The knowledge of angels is described as 
 " a natural knowledge, which is common to both good and evil angels 
 on account of their identity of nature; a revealed knowledge, which was 
 common to them all before the fall of some of them ; a beatific knowl- 
 edge, which belongs only to the angels that are confirmed in that which 
 is good." (Br. (255).) Many of the Dogmaticians, however, refrain 
 from all specific distinctions in regard to the kind and the degree of this 
 knowledge. Grh. (IV, 22): "For what can w r e, w r ho are worms 
 creeping upon the earth, assert, in this darkness of our mind, concerning 
 the understanding of the celestial spirits, when we cannot so much as 
 exactly comprehend our own understanding ? It is better therefore to 
 render devout thanks to God for the ministry of angels, which he daily 
 exhibits to us, than curiously to scrutinize beyond the limits of the Word 
 these mysteries and unrevealed matters." 
 
 [12] Holl. (382): "The will accompanies the intellect; liberty 
 accompanies the will. The angelic will is free, as well with respect to 
 immanent acts, of choosing or refusing* this or that object, as with 
 
ANGELIC POWEB. 213 
 
 respect to different external effects, while it freely does new this, now 
 that." 
 
 [13] Holl. (382): "The power of angels is great, but finite. (1) 
 It is great, for they are called ' mighty in strength ' [R. V.] Ps. 103 : 
 20 ; strong men armed, Luke 11 : 21. For they are able (a) to move 
 bodies by transferring them from place to place, Matt, 4 : 5, 8 ; Acts 
 8 : 39 ; (b) to destroy bodies, 2 Kings 19 : 35 ; (c) to assume bodies and 
 to join them, not essentially indeed or personally, but accidentally to 
 themselves, and to guide them as a helmsman guides a ship ; (eT) to 
 speak with God, with angels, and with men. They speak with God y 
 by directing their thoughts to God, while they adore and praise him ; 
 they speak with angels, while they freely impress upon them intelligible 
 conceptions ; they speak with men, by means of an audible and distinct 
 sound formed in the air in imitation of the human voice." (Quen., I, 
 446 : " That speaking is done by means of a sound formed in the as- 
 sumed bodies." But he prudently adds : "Here to be willing not to 
 know, what the best Master does not wish to teach, is learned ignor- 
 ance.") "(2) It is finite; angelic power is not infinite. For, since in- 
 finite power is peculiar to the Creator, it is not communicable to a mere 
 creature. Whence it happens that angels are not able (a) to create ; 
 (b) to beget ; (c) to change substances ; (d) to perform true miracles, 
 Ps. 72 : 18 ; (e) to cure all diseases ; (f) to raise the dead." 
 
 [14] Quen. (I, 446): ■" As to their original state, all angels were in 
 the beginning created by God equally righteous, good and holy, to 
 glorify God and render him a holy service." 
 
 This is proved : (a) By the general statement appended to the works 
 of the creation, Gen. 1 : 31. (b) From John 8 : 44. (c) From Jude 6, 
 where the fall of the angels is described both negatively and affirma- 
 tively, (d ) From 2 Pet. 2 : 4." 
 
 Holl. (385): " That grace bestowed (1) on the part of the intellect, 
 a certain habitual intellectual light or concreated knowledge for the re- 
 cognition of God and of his will ; (2) an habitual holiness of the will, 
 by which the angels were able in the state of probation to begin and to 
 end all their actions conformably to the eternal law of God." 
 
 Note It is further remarked that they were created in great num- 
 bers ; how great these were is not known by us. Quen. (I, 446): "Be- 
 cause the angels were not to be multiplied as men by procreation, but 
 were created at once by God, so there was a certain number of them 
 from the beginning, which, as it was not increased in the course of time, 
 nor will be increased, so also it will never be diminished. But how 
 great that number is the Scriptures do not teach, and there is nothing 
 
214 OF ANGELS. 
 
 further revealed eoncerning it to us than that it is great, Dan. 7 :10; 
 Matt. 25: 81; Heb. 12: 22." 
 
 [15] Holl. (385): " Perfect righteousness was concreated with the 
 angels, but it was not inamissible or incapable of being lost. For the 
 will of the angels in the state of grace was not fully fixed upon perpet- 
 ually loving and choosing the good ; but God granted to the angels lib- 
 erty of will, a concreated propensity towards the good, so that there was 
 in them not a very near but a very remote capacity to sin, consisting in 
 the negation both of impeccability and of the inamissibility of the con- 
 created blessings." 
 
 Quen. (1, 447) : " The fall of certain angels did not occur in conse- 
 quence of any concreated inclination or proclivity to evil, but through 
 the abuse of internal liberty ; i. e., certain angels fell while no intrinsic 
 principle was inclining or determining them to a fall, while no external 
 motive for falling was restraining or necessitating them ; but because 
 they had not yet been confirmed in the Good, and were indifferent to 
 good and evil, they abused their liberty, and with perfect freedom left 
 their own place." 
 
 N. B. — The whole context shows that Quen.'s phrase, " indifferent 
 to good and evil," is not meant to express indecision in regard to good 
 or evil, but only the capacity to choose the one as well as the other ; 
 and that the phrase is selected with special reference to the subsequent 
 condition in which the good angels are described as confirmed in that 
 which is good. 
 
 [16] Holl. (384): "The original state is the state of grace, which 
 all the angels possessed in the original creation through the grace of the 
 omnipotent Creator, and in which they were created equally wise and 
 holy, and were placed upon the way to eternal happi?iess." Cal. (IV, 
 57): "Before they were confirmed in the Good, they were on the way 
 to happiness; but they had not yet reached the goal itself, namely, hap- 
 piness." 
 
 [17] Quen. (I, 447): " With regard to their subsequent condition, 
 some of the angels continued in their concreated goodness, truth, and 
 holiness, and were confirmed in it by God ; but others, by sinning 
 through their own free will, fell away from their Creator. And hence 
 arose the distinction between the good and the evil angels." 
 
 The condition of the good angels, after that period, is called the state 
 of glory, and that of the evil angels the state of misery. Holl. (384): 
 " The state of glory is that in which the angels, who continued in con- 
 created wisdom and holiness, having been admitted to the unobscured 
 vision of God, perpetually enjoy his boundless goodness. Matt. 18 : 10 ; 
 
ALL WERE DESIGNED FOR ETERNAL HAPPINESS. 215 
 
 Ps. 16: 11. The state of misery (2 Pet. 2: 4) is the most lamentable 
 condition of" those angels who of their own accord fell away from God." 
 
 [18] Holl. (386): "The good angels are those who continued in 
 concreated true wisdom and holiness, and are so illuminated by God 
 with the light of glory and so confirmed in the Good that, free from the 
 danger of sinning, they clearly behold God and perpetually enjoy his 
 goodness." Quen. (I, 447): " They are called good angels, not so 
 much on account of their entitative, metaphysical, or transcendental 
 goodness, which belongs to all the evil angels ; for, in as far as they 
 have existence, in so far also they are good. Nor only on account of 
 their concreated good habit ; for in this respect also they were just like 
 the evil angels, who also equally had the same at first; but also on ac- 
 count of their good deeds, or their obedience yielded to God and their 
 perseverance in the Good, and finally on account of their confirmation 
 in the Good. The formal reason, therefore, why they are denominated 
 good angels is, because they persevered in the truth and goodness in 
 which they had been created, and are now so confirmed in it that they 
 never will either wish or be able to fall from it." 
 
 [19] Three things, therefore, according to Cal. (IV, 55), are to be 
 predicated of the good angels : " (1) Persistence and continuance in con- 
 created truth and holiness. (2) Divine confirmation in the Good, which 
 signifies an eternal, immutable persistence in the blessings bestowed in 
 creation, strength in the Good, or the gift of absolute perseverance, 
 and the great increase of those blessings. Hence arises impeccability." 
 Quen. (I, 448): " Good angels are so confirmed in the Good that, as 
 before they were only able not to sin, now they are altogether unable to 
 sin. Matt. 18:10; 6:10; 1 Tim. 5:21; Luke 20 : 36 ; Gal. 1 : 8." 
 Holl. (386) : " In the state of the way [Avhen upon trial] the angels 
 were able not to sin, i. e., there was not in them a very ready capacity or 
 propensity to sin, yet there was in them a remote capacity to come short 
 of their duty ; in the state of glory the angels are not able to sin, i. e., 
 there is in them neither a near nor a remote capacity for coming short, 
 but a sinlessness {ava/naprrjaia) , or, their impeccability is immutable and 
 their holiness inamissible. (3) The eternal enjoyment of God, which 
 properly is the state of glory, for which ultimately, or as a final goal, all 
 the angels had been created. For they were all originally created alike. 
 But when some fell away from God and deprived themselves of that 
 glory, forsaking their own habitation (Jude 6), the rest, who remained 
 in the truth, alone enjoyed the beatific vision of God or the state of eter- 
 nal happiness, who ' always behold the face of God the Father in heaven/ 
 Matt. 18: 10, and are thus called angels of light, 2 Cor. 11: 14; elect 
 
216 OF ANGELS. 
 
 angels, 1 Tim. 5:21; whence also holy men who are to be in the state 
 of glory are called ladyyeloi, equal to the angels. Luke 20 : 36." The 
 Dogmaticians usually represent the confirmation in the Good as a con- 
 sequence of the reception into the state of glory. Br. (269) ; " After 
 they (the good angels) had steadfastly exhibited to God their obedience 
 in the state of probation, while other angels had fallen away, it pleased 
 God to fill them with the light of glory, so that they were able clearly 
 and intuitively to recognize God (for this is to see the face of the heav- 
 enly Father). But this vision of God was followed by a most intense 
 love, by which the will of the angels cleaves to God in such a manner 
 that it cannot be turned away from him. And thus was effected their 
 confirmation in the Good, or the determination of their will towards the 
 Good ; so that, whatsoever they do, they do with reference to God as 
 the infinitely perfect and perfectly known Good, without any blemish, 
 without any defect." 
 
 Holl. (386) : u He who clearly beholds God the chief Good, cannot 
 but burn with perpetual love towards him, for he beholds nothing in 
 him but what is good and to be loved ; but he who perpetually loves 
 God cannot sin." Id. : " The good angels, then, are confirmed in the 
 Good when the light of glory is infused into them by God, so that their 
 confirmation in the Good is practically nothing else than the infusion of 
 the light of glory, in which they intuitively recognize God." That the 
 angels, after having once been admitted into the state of glory, cannot 
 possibly sin, is inferred principally from Luke 20: 36. Quen. (I, 448): 
 " Those who are to be blessed in eternal life are called 'equal unto the 
 angels.' Now, we are sure we shall never lose that celestial felicity ; 
 therefore, much more are the angels thus assured, to whom we shall be 
 like." Quen. (1, 448) appears to regard the confirmation in the Good 
 not so much a consequence of the enjoyment of God, as rather to be as- 
 sumed at once along with it: " The angels always behold the face of the 
 Father in heaven, which beatific vision of God presupposes the confir- 
 mation in the Good, excludes all sin, and introduces impeccability, i. e., 
 it makes angels and men happy, confirmed in the Good and impeccable" 
 
 This introduction to the state of glory is described as a reward which 
 the good angels receive from God, but yet only as one that proceeded 
 from the free grace of God ; at the same time it is described as having 
 been determined upon from eternity, but not by an absolute decree. 
 
 Holl. (387) : '* The glory of the angels who are confirmed in the 
 Good is to be attributed not to an absolute divine decree, nor to the 
 merit of Christ, nor to angelic merit, but to the most liberal goodness 
 of God, who remunerates the persevering obedience of the angels far be- 
 yond their desert." 
 
THE POWERS OE THE GOOD ANGELS ARE ENLARGED. 217 
 
 [20] Quen. (I, 448) : " It is to be observed in general, that now, 
 in consequence of and after this confirmation, there are greater excel- 
 lences and perfections in angels than before the confirmation." 
 
 Holl. (388) : " The angels acquired through the gift of confirmation 
 more excellent knowledge," more perfect holiness, more perfect freedom, 
 greater power, more complete concord." 
 
 [21] Quen. (1, 448) : " As to the intellect of the angels, it shines 
 no doubt with more illustrious radiance, since they have reached the 
 goal and are enjoying the beatific vision of God, in which there is ful- 
 ness of joy, Ps. 16 : 11 ; and hence they are called angels of light, on 
 account of the greater light of knowledge, 2 Cor. 11 : 14." But here 
 also the limitation is appended : " Although the intellectual power of 
 the good angels is very great, it is nevertheless finite (Mark 13 : 32 ; 1 
 Pet. 1 : 12), and circumscribed within its own limits. Their intellection 
 is capable of grasping very much (multiscia) but it is not omniscient, 
 neither is it able to anticipate future events, nor has it an a priori con- 
 sciousness of the recesses of the heart or of human thoughts." 
 
 [22] Cal. (IV, 60) : " (1) Holiness, not so much that in which by 
 nature they were holy, as they were in the state of grace ; but being 
 more perfect now in holiness, they are confirmed in the Good and 
 established in the state of glory ; since, from the more perfect knowledge 
 of God there has resulted a more perfect love of God, and so also a 
 more perfect holiness; and, since they are always (6ia navrog) illumi- 
 nated by the most glorious light of the knowledge and holiness of God, 
 Matt. 18 : 10 ; 2 Cor. 11 : 14, they rejoice in perfect holiness as that of 
 the finally blessed. . . . But this holiness of theirs is not essential; for 
 God alone is essentially holy; but it is accidental, because they were able 
 to lose it. Job 4 : 18." (2) Quen. (I, 449) : " This confirmation in 
 their original state did not deprive the good angels of their freedom, nor 
 did they cease for this reason to have a free will, but they rather attained 
 in this way to greater freedom. For they have (a) freedom from com- 
 pulsion, as they do not perform good works compulsorily, but freely and 
 of their own accord. They praise God and serve him freely, not by 
 compulsion, although they are not able not to praise him and do his will ; 
 (b) freedom of exercise, which is sometimes called freedom of contradic- 
 tion, which signifies that when anyone has an object proposed to him, he 
 can choose it or not choose it, can act or not act. The good angels have 
 also (c) the freedom of a certain specification ; that, namely, which con- 
 sists in freely choosing or not choosing between this or that good thing in 
 particular. For, although the freedom of specification, which is called 
 also the freedom of contrariety, implies indifference as to one of two 
 15 
 
218 OF ANGELS. 
 
 opposite things, a good and an evil, yet the good angels do not have free- 
 dom as to contrary acts, so as to be able to do good and evil, but they 
 are able to will and to do only good and thus the freedom of contrariety 
 does not belong to good angels ; nevertheless they have the freedom of 
 contradiction, by which although they necessarily choose the good, as to 
 the quality of the act, yet they are able freely to choose this good, and 
 not to choose another good, to do this good and not to do another good. 
 Yea, the freedom, not to be able to sin, not to be able to refrain from 
 doing good, is the very highest kind, which very highest grade of free- 
 dom God, the most free of all, enjoys." 
 
 [23] Quen. (I, 449): " The power of the good angels is very great. 
 For, though they were endowed with great strength at their creation, 
 they have acquired still more, since they have been advanced into the 
 state of glory, and by it are enabled to overcome the power of the 
 devils. Hence they are called ' those that excel in strength.' Ps. 103 : 
 20." But here also the limitation : " Although the power of the good 
 angels is great, it is yet finite and subordinate and subject to the divine 
 power and will." 
 
 [24] Ap. Conf., p. 224, 8. Comp. also p. 117. Hole. (390) : 
 " The holy angels perform their works and duties by standing before 
 God (with a most joyful psalmody Qpaljiudig^ they sing the praises of 
 God ; with the most humble worship (harpeia^ they revere and adore 
 God ; with the most prompt service (Aemwpy/a) they execute the will of 
 God), by assisting godly men, and by resisting devils and wicked 
 men." 
 
 More specifically Br. (272) (in imitation of the earliest Dogmaticians, 
 viz., Chmn., Grh.): "The good angels perform various functions in 
 their happy life, some of which pertain to their own happiness (for their 
 happiness does not consist in idleness, but in part itself signifies a cer- 
 tain activity {hvepyeia^ : in part, besides, admits various functions, to be 
 performed by those who are happy); others are ministerial, by which 
 the angels serve God and Christ, the God-man (Heb. 1 : 6, Matt. 4 : 11), 
 and promote human salvation." Id. (274): " The functions of the lat- 
 ter kind have respect partly to individual godly men, partly to guar- 
 dianship of the hierarchical estates and the promotion of their advantage. 
 The angels minister to godly individuals when they sustain them in the 
 beginning of life and in infancy (Matt. 18 : 10); when they render service 
 to those of maturer years in any honest calling (Ps. 34 : 7 ; 91 : 11, 12 ; 
 Matt. 1 : 19, 20 ; 2 : 13, 19 ; Acts 10 : 3, 7 ; Rev. 1 : 1 ; 22 : 6, 16 ; Dan. 
 6 : 22 ; Acts 12 : 7 ; 5 : 18, 19 ; Luke 1 : 13, 30, etc.); and finally, when 
 they are present with the dying, Luke 16 : 22." 
 
EMPLOYMENTS OF THE GOOD ANGELS. 219 
 
 Ap. Coxf. Art. xxi, 8 : . . . " We freely grant that the angels pray 
 for us. For we have the testimony of Zech. 1:12, where the angel 
 prays, ' O Lord of hosts, how long wilt thou not have mercy on Jerusa- 
 lem, etc.?' " 
 
 Br. (276): " It belongs to the office of the angels, with reference to the 
 ecclesiastical estate, to promote the ministry of the Word ; and especially, 
 to this end, they were present as servants at the promulgation of the 
 Mosaic law (Deut. 33 :2 ; Gal. 3: 19); they announced the incarnation 
 of Christ (Luke 1 : 26; 2:9); they resisted the introduction of idolatry 
 into the Church (Jude 9); and likewise are present in sacred assemblies 
 (1 Cor. 11:10; 1 Tim. 5:21)." 
 
 (lb.): " The political estate the angels serve by preventing the bonds 
 of the government from being sundered (Dan, 10: 13), by assisting and 
 defending the magistracy and its officers (Dan. 6:22), by warding off 
 dangers and destroying wicked enemies (2 Kings 19 : 35 ; Is, 37 : 36)." 
 
 Id. (277): "The domestic estate they serve by promoting the marriage 
 of the godly (Gen. 24:7), by guarding the household (Job 1 : 10 ; Ps. 
 34; 7), by guarding the pledges of domestic love, the children (Matt. 
 18:10)." 
 
 (lb.): "Finally, there will be a special duty of the angels, which 
 they will perform on the last day, when they will accompany Christ 
 coming to judgment, and announce his arrival with the sound of trum- 
 pets (Matt. 25 : 31 ; 1 Thess. 4: 16). They will collect human beings 
 from all parts of the world (Matt. 24 : 31 ; Mark 13 : 27), they will sepa- 
 rate the godly from the wicked (Matt. 13 : 41), they will place the for- 
 mer at the right hand of Christ (Matt. 25 : 43), taking them up to meet 
 him in the air (1 Thess. 4: 17); the latter, placed at the left hand of the 
 Judge (Matt. 25 : 33), they will then quickly cast into hell (Matt. 13 : 
 42, 50)." 
 
 The Dogmaticians acknowledge that they have no definite answer to 
 the question, whether every one have his own so-called guardian angel. 
 Br. (274): " This is certain, that the guardianship of any man is not 
 in such a way assigned to a particular angel that he is deprived of the 
 aid of the rest. But it still may be asserted with probability, that one 
 angel is appointed for the protection of each godly person, and that in 
 extraordinary cases many angels are sent to the help of single indi- 
 viduals." 
 
 [25] Ap. Coxf. P. II, Art. II : " Although the angels in heaven 
 pray for us, . . . yet it does not hence follow that they are to be in- 
 voked, adored, etc., by us." Br. (278): " On account of these perfec- 
 tions which we discover the angels to possess, and because they favor 
 
220 OF ANGELS. 
 
 and assist us very greatly, it is also becoming that we praise and love 
 them, and take heed lest we offend them by evil actions. But it is not 
 becoming in us to direct our prayers to the angels. For that is either 
 impious and idolatrous (namely, if we address religious prayers to them 
 with the belief that they can bestow upon us spiritual gifts), or it is at 
 least useless and ill-advised." 
 
 Holl. (392) : "Angels are not to be religiously adored or invoked." 
 
 [26] Holl. (392) : " There is no doubt as to the existence of a cer- 
 tain order among the good angels, but what or what manner of angelic 
 order that is, we think no one can know in this life. Proof: (a) From 
 the general rule, according to which God wishes everything in the 
 church militant to be done decently and in order, 1 Cor. 14 : 40. There- 
 is no doubt, therefore, that there is a certain order among the blessed 
 angels, and that the more perfect, as the church triumphant is more 
 splendid than the church militant. (6) From the different designations 
 of the celestial spirits, Eph. 1 ; 21 ; Col. 1: 16; 1 Thess. 4: 16, and 
 Jude 9. The different names imply a distinction among the angels. 
 (c) From analogy. There is an order among the wicked angels ; there- 
 fore also among the good. The former is proved by Luke 11 : 15, 
 where Beelzebub is called the chief of devils, and Matt. 25 : 41, where 
 mention is made of the devil and his angels." 
 
 [27] Quen. (I, 450) : " Angels are called evil, not because of their 
 essence, for in respect to their essence they are good, and were created 
 along with the rest of the angels in truth, holiness, and righteousness ; 
 but (1) in respect to their evil conduct, viz., their malicious defection 
 and apostasy from God ; (2) in respect to the habitual wickedness, or 
 the horrible depravity of their nature, which was consequent upon that 
 conduct ; (3) in respect to their perseverance and persistence in incor- 
 rigible wickedness ; and (4) on account of their evil doings ; for they 
 perpetrate only evil." 
 
 [28] Quen. (I, 452) : " It does not appear what exactly was the first 
 sin of the evil angels. The temptation, however, with which Satan 
 attacked and overcame our first parents, Gen. 3 : 5, and his character 
 and his perpetual effort to transfer the glory of God to himself, Matt. 4: 
 9, [1 Tim. 3 : 6,] render probable the opinion of those who think that 
 it was an affected resemblance to the Deity (deiformitas) or an affecta- 
 tion of superior pre-eminence {vTrepoxvQ)" 
 
 [29] Quen. (I, 452) : " The generic form of the diabolical fall con- 
 sisted in the free and spontaneous turning away from God and the rule 
 of right. For they were able to persevere in truth and concreated holi- 
 ness and not fall away from it; they were able by the grace of crea- 
 
CONSEQUENCES OF THE FALL OF THE EVIL ANGELS. 221 
 
 tion to keep the rule of right ; of their own accord, therefore, and 
 freely they sinned, by the abuse of the freedom that was bestowed upon 
 them. For they did not sin through any defect or impotence of nature, 
 but from pure malice and contumacy, and by the spontaneous abuse of 
 the will conferred upon them." 
 
 [30] Quen. (I, 452): "Those who fell were individual angels, whose 
 number is not mentioned in the Scriptures ; that they w r ere many, 
 however, we infer from the multitude of demons, Mark 5:9; Luke 
 8: 30." 
 
 Id. (I, 453) : " In what order the wicked angels sinned, whether all 
 at once, whether one after another, or whether first one fell and by his 
 example and persuasion induced others to apostasy and the fall, con- 
 cerning this the Scholastics dispute, but &rep -ypaffig, with no scriptural 
 ground for their opinions." 
 
 Holl. (399) : " It is probable that the wicked angels fell under the 
 guidance of a certain leader or chief, whom the Scriptures call Satan 
 and the devil, John 8: 44 ; Luke 11 : 15, who by his example or per- 
 suasion drew many angels into the fellowship of his crime. Rev. 12: 4." 
 
 As to the time of the fall : Holl. (lb.) : "They fell, not within the 
 six days of creation, but after they were ended (Gen. 1 : 31). Before 
 the fall of our first parents, in the second week of the foundation of the 
 world, but upon what day it is uncertain." 
 
 [31] Br. (280) : " The crime having been committed, all those angels 
 lost the grace that had been concreated with them, and so fell into the 
 most horrible misery without hope of restoration." 
 
 Cal. (IV, 318): "The punishment of the wicked angels is partly 
 the eternal desertion of God, whence they can never be converted ; 
 partly, rejection to infernal torments to be endured forever." 
 
 Holl. (403) more specifically distinguishes the punishment of loss 
 from the punishment of the senses : " The punishment of loss, which is 
 also designated as privative, is the most lamentable casting away of 
 grace and glory. The punishment of sense consists of the positive tor- 
 ments which the demons are keenly enduring ever since the fall, and 
 the still greater ones which they will undergo on the day of final judg- 
 ment. (2 Pet. 2: 4; Jude 6.)" Br. (288): "The punishments 
 which are inflicted upon the wicked angels will be eternal. Matt. 25 : 
 41-46 ; Mark 9 : 43." 
 
 To the question, "Why may not the wicked angels be restored to 
 favor? " Grh. (IV, 34) answers: " It is better to proclaim the won- 
 derful philanthropy and mercy of the Son of God towards the fallen race 
 of man, by which on our account and for our salvation he descended 
 
222 OF ANGELS. 
 
 from heaven and became man, not taking on him the nature of angels 
 but the seed of Abraham (Heb. 2: 16), than to scrutinize beyond the 
 limits the causes of that most just judgment, by which God delivered 
 the angels who had fallen away from him to be cast in chains of dark- 
 ness into hell, to be reserved for judgment." The reason for their eter- 
 nal rejection is usually found in the greatness of their crime. Holl. 
 (398) indicates the atrocity of their crime: "(a) From the person 
 offended, who is God, the most kind and mighty Creator of the angels. 
 (b) From the helps, by the aid of which they were able to turn aside the 
 evil. For the intellect of the angels was resplendent with an extraor- 
 dinary light of knowledge. Their will was distinguished by perfect 
 holiness, (c) From the mode of sinning. For the angels sinned, not 
 through infirmity or inadvertence, but in the full possession of their in- 
 tellect, with deliberate design and the voluntary abuse of their free will, 
 no one instigating them." 
 
 [32] Quen. (I, 454) : "The evil angels did not lose, through their 
 fall, their natural knowledge, or that which they had by the light of 
 nature, for they know God and other supernatural things after a certain 
 manner. But that knowledge of supernatural things is joined, 1, with 
 great hatred and murmuring against God; 2, with jealousy, envy, and 
 rage against good angels and godly and happy men ; 3, with ignorance, 
 doubt, error, and forge tfulness. Matt. 4:6; John 13: 2 ; 1 Cor. 2 : 8. 
 Yet they have altogether lost the knowledge derived from the light of 
 grace." Holl. (399): "The evil angels know God, but they dread- 
 fully shudder at this divine knowledge." Br. (280): "Their intellect 
 is deprived, not only of the light of grace, but also of the light of glory ; 
 and, being fixed upon the contemplation of the divine wrath and their 
 own misery, it is as it were blunted, and wants a sound judgment con- 
 cerning the doing of that which is good. (Besides, the corruption of the 
 diabolic intellect can be shown from the fact that Satan so studiously 
 sought to accomplish the death of Christ, not thinking that he was there- 
 by bringing the greatest adversity upon himself. But the natural 
 knowledge that remains in the wicked angels adds no happiness to those 
 rejected by God.)" Their further gifts are thus described, .Holl. (399): 
 " Their will, inclined to evil, does not rejoice in that liberty which im- 
 plies indifference to good or evil, or to many things that are good, but 
 their freedom is exercised with reference to particular evils. Their 
 power is, indeed, more than human, but is restrained by the divine 
 power, so that without the permission of God they can accomplish noth- 
 ing." Quen. (I, 454): " From divine revelation they sometimes cer- 
 tainly know future contingencies, Job 1 : 12 ; 2 : 6 ; 1 Kings 22 : 22. 
 
CHARACTERISTICS OF DEMONIACAL POSSESSION. 223 
 
 And some things they know with a measure of probability by their 
 natural sagacity." 
 
 [33] Holl. (400) : " The doings of the wicked angels are of various 
 kinds, but they are all directed to the injury of the divine glory (Rev. 
 12: 7), and to the temporal as well as eternal ruin of individual men, 
 and of the ecclesiastical estates.'' Specifically (403) : " The evil de- 
 mons are assiduously plotting to disturb, overturn, and totally destroy 
 the ecclesiastical estate (by scattering heresies, Matt. 13 : 27 and 28 ; by 
 hindering the efforts of godly ministers of the Church, 1 Thess. 2 : 18 ; 
 by averting the minds of hearers from the meditation and practice of 
 the divine Word, Luke 8 : 12 ; by exciting persecutions against the 
 kingdom of Christ, Rev. 12 : 7), the political estate (1 Kings 22 : 21 ; 1 
 Chron. 22 : 1), and the domestic estate (by alienating the minds of mar- 
 ried persons ; for the devil was a murderer from the beginning, who 
 delighted in sowing contentions, John 8 : 44 ; by lying in wait for the 
 children and possessions of parents, Job 1 : 11—19)." 
 
 Among the evils that are inflicted upon individual persons by the evil 
 spirits there is especially reckoned corporeal and spiritual possession. 
 The general description of this we cite from Quen. (I, 456) : " It is an 
 action of the devil, by which, through' the permission of God, he insti- 
 gates men to sin, and occupies and torments their bodies, that they may 
 throw away their eternal salvation. Through the former, viz., the in- 
 stigation to sin, there originates the spiritual possession; through the 
 latter, viz., his occupation of human bodies, there originates the cor- 
 poreal possession. The former is meant when it is said that the devil 
 possesses and fills the minds and hearts of the wicked, enters into these, 
 and works in them (kvepyeiv), Acts 5:3; Luke 22 : 3 ; John 13 : 2 ; 2 
 Thess. 2:9; Eph. 2 : 2. The latter is meant when the devil imme- 
 diately and locally exists and operates in a body, and controls it for the 
 time being. Matt. 4 : 24 ; 8 : 16 and 28; Mark. 7 : 25 ; 9 : 17 ; Matt. 
 12: 22; 15: 22; Luke 4 : 33; Acts 8*: 7 ; 19 : 13." The spiritual 
 possession is more minutely described by Quen. (I, 456) as follows : 
 " Its form consists partly in the nearer presence of the substance of the 
 devil to the soul of the wicked person, Luke 11 : 24, 26 ; partly in an 
 efficacious working (hepyeia) propelling to certain crimes." As the sub- 
 ject in which (of the spiritual possession) there is designated ; " the soul 
 of a wicked person, conducting itself not merely passively, but, at the 
 same time, actively and as a co-worker with the devil. John 8: 44." 
 (lb.) As the subject in which (of the corporeal possession) there is 
 designated : " a human body in a merely passive condition ; mediately, 
 however, and by way of sympathy also, the soul is affected by that evil. 
 
224 OF ANGELS. 
 
 (Satan moves the body of the possessed person and its members at his 
 own pleasure, etc.)" (I, 457.) 
 
 The corporeal possession can befall also a godly person. Quen. (I, 
 457): " The subject of it is not only a wicked man, but also sometimes a 
 godly one, Mark 9 : 21 ; since it occasionally happens that, through the 
 secret but most just judgment and purpose of God, also upright men are 
 possessed by the devil. God gives over the wicked to be possessed by 
 the devil, that they may be punished and corrected, but the godly, that 
 the wickedness of their sins may be exhibited and their faith exercised." 
 
 Concerning the signs of corporeal possession, Holl. (402) remarks: 
 " Let the various signs of corporeal possession be carefully examined, 
 some of which are peculiar to the possessed, and some are common also 
 to the melancholy, ecstatic, and phrenetic : and so they are to be taken 
 and considered, not separately but conjointly, lest we consider those 
 afflicted with serious diseases as possessed persons. The marks of cor- 
 poreal posssession are, 1. The knowledge of strange languages and 
 branches of knowledge, obtained without study ; 2. The knowledge and 
 manifestation of occult and future things; 3. Speech, uttered with open 
 mouth, and without the necessary movement of the organs ; 4. Mimick- 
 ing of little birds, sheep, oxen, swine, bears, etc. ; 5. Strength superhu- 
 man, in carrying immense burdens; 6. Horrid blasphemies uttered 
 against the most sacred Deity ; 7. A sudden violence done the body 
 without the dissolution of the bodily frame, Luke 4 : 35 ; 8. Impure, 
 cruel, terrible gestures and acts, e. g., they sometimes foam at the mouth, 
 gnash their teeth, cast themselves into the water, into the fire, and try to 
 commit suicide ; 9. Severe internal torment in the bowels and other 
 parts of the body, and swelling of the belly ; 10. Loss of the senses, both 
 internal and external, and of the faculty of locomotion, Matt. 15 : 22 ; 
 17 : 15 ; Luke 8 : 27-35 ; Mark 1 : 24." 
 
 Some of the Dogmaticians mention also spectres, by which the evil 
 spirits have frightened men. Holl.: "The Scriptures teach that the 
 evil demons make a mock of men with spectres, Is. 13:21; 34:14; 
 Wis. 17 : 3, 4 ; Matt. 14 : 26 ; Luke 24 : 37." But " Spectres are not 
 the souls of the dead. Luke 16 : 29 ; Wis. 3 : 1." 
 
 [34] Br.: " Meanwhile God himself uses the ministry of evil spirits 
 for chastening the godly in this world (e. g., Job), and for punishing the 
 wicked, as well in life (Ps. 78 : 49) as after death. (Matt. 18 :34.)" 
 
PART II. 
 
 OF MAN. 
 
 § 23. General Statement. 
 
 TN the first part we treated of God in general, and of the works 
 -*- that he has made ; we now proceed to treat of Man, for 
 whose sake the world was made, and for whose redemption Christ 
 appeared. Here we are to describe his moral condition, %. e., the 
 condition in which he now is, and because of which he needs 
 redemption. [1] Inasmuch, however, as his present moral condi- 
 tion cannot be described without first explaining how it came to 
 be, for it is no longer the original condition in which he was 
 created, the description of the moral condition in which man is 
 now must be preceded by the description of his original condi- 
 tion. [2] 
 
 The second part, therefore, falls into two divisions : I. The 
 State of Integrity; II. The State of Corruption. 
 
 CHAPTEK I. 
 
 Of the State of Integrity. 
 § 24. State of Integrity Defined. 
 
 u 
 
 n~^HE state of integrity is the original condition of man, 
 -*- created after the image of God, in goodness and rectitude." 
 Quen. (II, 2.) The first condition of man is thus designated, be- 
 cause in it he was entirely uninjured and incorrupt in all his 
 endowments, powers, and attributes. [3] This condition is more 
 
226 THE STATE OF INTEGRITY. 
 
 specifically described by the expression, " the image of God in 
 which man was created" (Gen. 1 : 26, 27 ; 5 : 1) ; for man is distin- 
 guished from all other creatures in this, that he was made after 
 the image of God. [4] This expression denotes, in general, a re- 
 semblance to God, which has its ground in this, that God took 
 himself, so to speak, as a pattern and archetype according to 
 which he created man. [5] The passages Col. 3 : 10 and Eph. 4 : 
 24 teach in what particulars the resemblance to God consists, by 
 which his original condition is described. [6] In these, the apos- 
 tle states that mankind, whom he presupposes to have lost the 
 image of God, must be renewed again in the same ; and, inasmuch 
 as he describes the new condition as that in which mankind are 
 renewed by the power of the Holy Ghost, in true righteousness 
 and holiness, we see that he means by the image of God (Gen. 1 
 and 5), the peculiar spiritual and moral perfection of man's orig- 
 inal condition. [7] Quen. (II, 9): " The image of God is a nat- 
 ural perfection, consisting in an entire conformity with the 
 wisdom, justice, immortality, and majesty of God, which was 
 divinely created in the first man, in order that he might perfectly 
 know, love, and glorify God, his Creator." [8] Accordingly, 
 man in his original condition possessed : 
 
 (1) Wisdom and the power to understand perfectly, according 
 to the measure of his necessities, things divine, human and na- 
 tural. [9] 
 
 (2) Holiness and freedom of the will, according to which man 
 loved God and that which is good, and possessed the power to 
 live, in all respects, in conformity with the will of God. [10] 
 
 (3) Purity of the natural affections, and the perfect harmony 
 of all his powers and impulses. [11] Holl. (470): "The per- 
 fections constituting the image of God were an intellect excelling 
 in knowledge, perfect holiness and freedom of the will, absolute 
 purity of the sensuous appetites, and the most harmonious agree- 
 ment of the affections with the decision of the intellect and guid- 
 ance of the will, in conformity with the wisdom, holiness, and 
 purity of God, as far as was consistent with the capacity of the 
 first man." 
 
 These spiritual and moral excellences, thus described, are the 
 true reason why man is called the image of God. [12] They are 
 
THE STATE OF INTEGRITY. 227 
 
 also summed up in the expression "original righteousness." [13] 
 With these there are yet connected, as a natural consequence 
 from them, corporeal excellences, and a peculiarly exalted posi- 
 tion in relation to the external world, [14J viz., (a) corporeal im- 
 passibility and immortality ; for neither suffering nor death could 
 touch man thus spiritually and morally endowed ; and (b) exter- 
 nal dominion over the other animals (Gen. 1 : 26-28), for in this 
 also does the exalted dignity of the likeness to God manifest it- 
 self. Holl. (475): "The less principal perfections included in 
 the image of God, are the immunity of body, infected with no 
 stain of sin, from passions, its immortality and complete control 
 over sublunary creatures, especially beasts." [15] Man, thus 
 created, could not but rejoice in unalloyed happiness, to which 
 also his residence in Paradise, "a most pleasant habitation," con- 
 tributed its share. [16] 
 
 All these excellences we must designate as natural to man, not 
 indeed in the sense that if he lost them he would no longer be 
 the same being; but yet in this sense, that they were created 
 along with him, and that they cannot be separated from him 
 without making his whole condition different from what it for- 
 merly was. This is expressed in the statement, that the image 
 of God is a natural perfection, and not an external, supernatural, 
 and supplementary gift. [17] This condition, with all its excel- 
 lences, man would also have propagated to his posterity (by na- 
 tural generation, Gen. 5:3; Eom. 5 : 12), had he not fallen. If we 
 inquire concerning supernatural gifts, of which man, in his origi- 
 nal condition, was a partaker, they can be more easily enumerated, 
 viz.: "The supernatural favor of God, the gracious indwelling of 
 the most holy Trinity, and the enjoyment and delight thence de- 
 rived;" for these gifts are to be regarded, in a certain sense, as 
 peculiar additions and consequences, flowing from man's happy 
 and morally good condition. [18] 
 
 [1] Que>\ (II, 1) : " The subject of Theology is man, who fell into 
 misery from his original happy state, and who is to be brought back to 
 God and eternal salvation. The discussion here is not of man as to his 
 essence, and as he is a creature, . , . but as he is such or such a crea- 
 ture ; and in regard to his state, which before the fall was innocent and 
 most happy, but after the fall corrupt and most miserable." 
 
228 THE STATE OF INTEGRITY. 
 
 [2] Holl. (461): "Concerning the fall of man, the condition from 
 which (terminus a quo) as well as the condition into which he fell (ter- 
 minus ad quern) is to be considered. The condition from which he fell, 
 is the state of innocence or integrity. The misery of fallen man can- 
 not be accurately measured, unless the happiness which preceded it, and 
 of which man, alienated from God, deprived himself, can be exactly 
 estimated. For the loss of anything is understood from previous pos- 
 session of it, and the magnitude of an evil is estimated by the good 
 which has been lost." The various conditions of man, Cal. (IV, 385) 
 enumerates in the following order : " The states of man, which come to 
 be considered in Theology, are diverse. One before the fall, which is 
 called the state of innocence ; one after the fall, which again is divided 
 into a state of sin without grace, which they call estate of sin or corrup- 
 tion ; and a state of sin under grace, through a gracious renovation com- 
 menced in this life, and completed in the next : whence the state of 
 grace in this life is called the state of renovation, to which the state of 
 glory succeeds in another life. . . . Moreover, although God desires 
 the renovation of all men, and the Sacred Scriptures and Theology have 
 been directed to this point, yet many are not renewed, who, consequently, 
 after this life, are compelled to undergo another state, viz., that of eter- 
 nal condemnation. Thus, if all the conditions of man are to be re- 
 garded, five states may be assigned to him, viz., of nature innocent, cor- 
 rupt, renewed, glorinVd, and condemned ; or a state of innocence, of 
 misery, of grace, of eternal glory, and of eternal shame. The Papists 
 err, who invent yet another state, which they call that of the (purorum 
 naturalium) purely natural, which is nothing more than a mere figment 
 of the Scholastics ; since, indeed, a man never did exist, nor could exist, 
 with the simple negation both of innocence and grace, of sin and misery, 
 who was neither just nor unjust, and who neither pleased nor offended 
 God." In the topic which is under discussion by us, only the first two 
 states are considered, for the subject of Theology is only " man in a 
 state of sin, who is to be restored to salvation." 
 
 [3] Cal. (IV, 389) : " It is called a state of integrity, because man 
 in it was upright and uncorrupt (Eccl. 7 : 29) in intellect, will, the cor- 
 poreal affections and endowments, and in all things was perfect. They 
 call it also the state of innocence, because he was innocent and holy, free 
 from sin and pollution." 
 
 [4] Br. (289): " It is evident that there are other creatures which 
 are called very good, and, though created according to a certain form, 
 agreeably to the divine intellect, yet not in the image of God." 
 
 [5] Holl. (462): "The formal requisites of an image, generically 
 
MEANING OF THE IMAGE OF GOD. 229 
 
 considered, are: (1) Resemblance or agreement with the model or pro- 
 totype ; because it is the property of an image to represent that of which 
 it is an image ; but this cannot be done without resemblance ; (2) Ori- 
 gin, or the process by which the image is made after the model, because 
 the image was made to imitate the prototype, for the sake of represent- 
 ing it." The difference, according to Holl. (lb.), between a vestige 
 (vestigium) and an image, is expressed in the following manner: "An 
 image clearly represents that of which it is an image ; a vestige ob- 
 scurely points to that of which it is a vestige. In all creatures are seen 
 the vestiges of divine power, wisdom, and goodness ; but in unfallen 
 man the image of God shone forth with full splendor." Holl. (464) : 
 'TT1D*! ^ the archetype, like which anything is made, as is indicated 
 by the prefix ^. But D/'V * s tne ectv P e m which the express resem- 
 blance is seen. Hence the meaning of the words : ' Let us make man 
 in a condition which may be determined according to our perfections 
 and bear our likeness.' Cf. Dan. 10 : 16. But in another passage, 
 Gen. 5 : 3, rflDl denotes the ectype, and D^V tm3 archetype, as the 
 former is connected by the ^, and the latter by the ^." Yet Br. (290) 
 remarks concerning this general definition of image : " The image of 
 God in man ought not to be referred to all things which are in God ; 
 neither can it be so referred ; nor is it in man in the same degree of 
 perfection in which it is in God." The expression image is found in 
 Gen. 1 : 26. Concerning the meaning of the words D^V an d JTlD*! 
 Holl. (463) says : " In the original (Gen. 1 : 26) two words are em- 
 ployed, viz., D 1 ?^ image, and rVlft'l likeness, not that they are ex- 
 pressions for different things and that image denotes the very substance 
 of the human soul and likeness its accidental perfections or attributes 
 (as some of the Papists say), but that the latter may be exegetical of 
 the former, and that image may be designated as most like or very sim- 
 ilar." [Teller adds the following note to Holl. (462) : "An image 
 properly so called is that in which there is seen an agreement with 
 another, from which it so derives its origin that the properties of the 
 former appear in the latter. Hence there are three things properly so 
 called which are required in an image : (1) An archetype. (2) An 
 ectype. (3) An agreement between the two. An agreement alone is 
 therefore insufficient, but origin is especially necessary, and that in such 
 way that express properties of the archetype are conspicuous."] 
 
 [6] It is well known that the expression, image of God, is employed 
 in a variety of significations, and therefore we must ascertain from other 
 
230 THE STATE OF INTEGRITY. 
 
 passages in what respect man can be said to be like God. In the fol- 
 lowing passages, Cal. (IV, 572) furnishes the proper rule according to 
 which we can discover the resemblance which we are considering : "In- 
 asmuch as the conformity of man to God, as an archetype, is found to 
 be manifold, and in respect to this conformity, the image of God is 
 variously defined by different persons, the following rule should be par- 
 ticularly observed, lest we should here depart from the proper sense 
 of the Scriptures : That the conformity of man to God refers to the image 
 of God, which, having been impressed upon our first parents in crea- 
 tion, and having been almost entirely lost through transgression, is to be 
 restored by renovation in this life, and chiefly in blessed regeneration 
 for the life to come.'''' This rule points to the passages, Col. 3 and Eph. 
 4, from which we learn that the likeness to God, which we are here dis- 
 cussing, must consist of spiritual and moral attributes. Therefore, the 
 image of God, which is ascribed to man in his original state, is described 
 as "accidental, the accidental (mutable and amissible) perfections of 
 which are conformed to the infinite perfections of God, according to the 
 measure of human capacity." Holl. (46*2). Through this definition 
 the accidental image of God is distinguished (1) from the substantial 
 image of God, which is Christ, according to 2 Cor. 4:4; Col. 1 : 15 ; 
 Heb. 1:3; and by which the sameness of the essence of the Father and 
 the Son is pointed out. Holl. (462): " The substantial image is the 
 eternal Son of God, because he exhibits in himself the entire essence of 
 the Father, being distinguished from him by the mode of his subsis- 
 tence." (2) This definition shows that the advantages of man's origi- 
 nal condition, whether of the body or of the soul, do not make up his 
 being itself, but that they consist of attributes which are, indeed, inti- 
 mately united with it, but yet, when they are removed, the being of man 
 remains unaltered. According to the position above assumed, Cal. pro- 
 ceeds : '-Whence it is clear that the conformity (to God) which is found 
 in the substance of the soul, or of the body, does not belong to the image 
 of God, which is described in the language of the Scriptures, because 
 the substance of the soul, or of the body, was not destroyed by the fall, 
 neither is it restored by renovation." Quen. (II, 17): " We must distin- 
 guish between the substance of man, or the matter itself of which he is 
 composed, and that which, as if something following, adheres most 
 closely to the substance of man, and nevertheless, as to its accidents, per- 
 fects it internally ; or we must distinguish between nature itself and its 
 qualities, or perfections in the qualities ; the image of God indicates the 
 latter, not the former. In short: the image of God is not man, but in 
 man, i. e., it is not substantial or essential to man, but accidental. In 
 
THE IMAGE OF GOD IN MAN. . 231 
 
 opposition to the views of the followers of Flacius, who maintain that 
 the image of God was the substantial form itself of the first man, and 
 the very essence of the rational soul, which was entirely lost in the fall 
 of Adam." 
 
 A distinction is made, also, in the " accidental" image of God " em- 
 ployed generically and figuratively , or specifically and literally." In the 
 former sense the resemblance of man [to God] is asserted " on account 
 of a certain analogy or similarity to God." (Holl. (463): " The sub- 
 stance itself, of the human soul, exhibits certain things that are tieia or 
 divine, and stands related to the Divinity as to a model. For God is a 
 spirit, immaterial, intelligent, acting with a free will, etc. These pred- 
 icates can, in a certain manner, be affirmed of the human soul.") In 
 this sense, however, man did not lose it through the fall, and therefore 
 it can be affirmed of him also after the fall, Gen. 9:6; James 3 : 9. 
 Only in this latter sense is the term employed while we treat of the state 
 of integrity. Quen. (II, 17): "The image of God, specifically em- 
 ployed, is not to be sought for in those things which yet remain in man 
 since the fall, and which are truly in man unregenerate. Because the 
 image of God, having been lost through the obedience of the first Adam, 
 must be restored by a new creation, through the disobedience of the sec- 
 ond Adam." Consequently, in the topic now under discussion, we under- 
 stand by the image of God " only those gifts and graces granted to man in 
 his first creation and lost by the fall, i. e., the integrity and rectitude of 
 all the powers concreated with the first man." 
 
 [7] Grh. (IV, 242): " In the following passages (Col. 3 and Eph. 
 4) the phrases 'after the image of God' and ' after God' are synony- 
 mous. There is exhibited in these a description of the new man, who 
 is called new, not by reason of a change of essence, but on account of 
 new qualities, the knowledge of God, righteousness, and true holiness. 
 The image of God consists in that in respect of which man was made after 
 God, and is renewed after the image of God ; but he is renewed in re- 
 spect of the knowledge of God, righteousness, and holiness, etc., and in 
 these particulars he is made like God, in the image of God. Therefore, 
 the primeval image of God in man consists of these things." 
 
 [8] Br. (293): "The divine image, in the special acceptation of the 
 term, implies certain accidental perfections, created in the intellect and 
 will of the first men, conformable to the perfections which are in God, 
 and bestowed upon men for the purpose of directing aright, and perfect- 
 ing their actions, in order that they may attain the ultimate end." 
 
 Grh. (IV, 248): " This is the description of the image of God in the 
 first man, given in the Scriptures, which is, namely, that it was right- 
 
232 THE STATE OF INTEGRITY. 
 
 eousness and true holiness, by which are meant the highest rectitude, 
 integrity, and conformity to the divine law, of all the powers of soul 
 and body, the highest perfection, innocence, and purity of the whole 
 man, which his nakedness and his dwelling in Paradise prove." 
 
 [9] Br. (293): "In respect of intellect, God bestowed upon the first 
 men, in imitation of himself, as of a model, a certain wisdom, i. e., a 
 certain habitual enlightenment or perfection of intellect, so that they 
 attained a high degree of knowledge in things divine, human, and nat- 
 ural, and that which was sufficient for their primeval state." The proof 
 of this, according to Quen. (II, 5) appears: u (l) from Col. 3 : 9, 10; 
 (2) from the acts of Adam, which are : (a) an appropriate application 
 of names, Gen. 2:19, which was not only grammatical as to the no- 
 menclature of the animals, but even highly logical as to the most correct 
 definition ; (b) his recognition of Eve, Gen. 2 : 23 ; (c) prophecy, or a 
 prediction concerning the perpetuity of the conjugal relation, Gen. 2: 
 24." 
 
 The nature and extent of this wisdom are more particularly defined 
 in the following : Br. (294) : " So that the intellect of man understood 
 the essence and will of God, so far as it was necessary to attain this 
 end, viz., that the intellect might prescribe the worship that should be 
 rendered to God, or so far as was essential to right and holy living." 
 This wisdom is described as u of such a nature that it could still be in- 
 creased in the course of time, and not as so perfect and comprehensive 
 that it could extend to the knowledge of the free decrees of God, or that 
 it implied a perfectly accurate knowledge of all natural things." 
 
 Quen. (II, 6) : " This knowledge of Adam was excellent, full, per- 
 fect, and such as no man since the fall can acquire, either from the 
 volume of nature or from that of Scripture. When, therefore, the in- 
 quiry is made, whether the intellect of the apostles, after the reception 
 of the Holy Ghost, was superior to that of Adam before the fall? the 
 reply is, we must distinguish between the knowledge of divine things 
 and the mysteries of faith, and the perfect and complete knowledge of all 
 things natural and useful to man. In reference to the former, we can 
 believe that the apostles possessed greater knowledge than Adam, be- 
 cause, after the advent of Christ, these things were known more fully 
 and distinctly than before. In reference to the latter, Adam excelled 
 all men, and therefore also the apostles, both extensively or in compass, 
 and intensively or in mode or depth of knowledge; and that too, de- 
 rived, not from probable reason or inferences, but from the proper 
 causes of each thing, and also by the tenacity and unchangeableness of 
 his knowledge. Hence it is evident that the knowledge of Adam was 
 
THE IMAGE OF GOD IN MAN. 233 
 
 finite and limited, because he knew not the secret decrees of God, nor 
 the thoughts of the heart, nor future contingencies, nor the number of 
 the stars. This knowledge also, which was concreate with Adam, could 
 have been perfected more and more, and admitted of augmentation, if 
 you regard the perfection of the degree of knowledge, both by revela- 
 tion, or a more extended knowledge of God in supernatural things, as 
 also by his own experience and observation in things natural." 
 
 Holl. (471): "The knowledge of Adam was truly excellent, and 
 sufficient for his primeval state ; but it was not the intuitive knowledge of 
 God. For the clear vision of God is not given on earth, but is promised 
 to be given in heaven. 1 Cor. 13 : 12; 1 John 3 : 2." 
 
 [10] Br. (294) : "In regard to the will, spiritual strength was be- 
 stowed by God upon man, or an habitual inclination and prompting to 
 love God above all things, and to do all things according to the direc- 
 tion of an intellect rightly illuminated ; but to a\oid what it judged 
 should be avoided ; and to govern the lower powers of his nature, lest 
 they should in some way break forth into inordinate and sinful acts." 
 
 Quest. (II, 6) : "The perfection of the will of the first man, there- 
 fore, consisted (1) in a natural inclination to that which is good, which 
 altogether excluded every proximate power of erring ; (2) in a free and 
 unhindered volition of good, and the execution of that volition ; and thus 
 there was in him a holy freedom of the will, and a free holiness which 
 excluded all sin. But his will was so free that it inclined only to good, 
 and was not prone to the choice of evil or the neglect of good ; whatever 
 occurred afterwards, happened through an unfortunate abuse of the 
 freedom of the will." But "holiness in the first man did not introduce 
 absolute impeccability, but only a relative freedom from sin in his will." 
 
 [11] Holl. (474) : " There were in the first man the most exact 
 harmony and wonderful agreement of all the higher and lower powers 
 of his nature. For reason most promptly obeyed the divine law, the 
 will reason, the sensuous appetite the will, the affections the appetite, 
 and the members of the body the affections." 
 
 Br. (295) : " For this reason it is that our first parents, in the state 
 of integrity, knew not that they were naked, neither blushed ; i. e., 
 their sensuous appetites (although an object were present which could 
 entice them) were not influenced, even in the least degree, by any inor- 
 dinate affection. Gen. 2 : 25." 
 
 Holl. (474): " There is an antithesis of the Papists and Socinians, 
 ascribing to our first parents a concreated rebellion of the sensuous appe- 
 tite against the judgment of sound reason." 
 
 [12] Br. (296): " This wisdom, righteousness, and holiness of the 
 16 
 
 
234 THE STATE OF INTEGRITY. 
 
 first men so express the idea of the divine image, that it is they only 
 from which man, speaking in the abstract, can be called the image of 
 God." 
 
 [13] The expression " original righteousness " was the one more fre- 
 quently employed, in the earliest systems of divinity, to point out man's 
 original condition. Ap. Conf. (I, 17) : " Original righteousness im- 
 plies not only an equable temperament of the bodily qualities, but also 
 these gifts, viz., a more certain knowledge of God, fear of God, confi- 
 dence in God, or a certain rectitude and power of attaining them. 
 And this is proved by the Scriptures, when they say (Gen. 1 : 27) that 
 man was made in the image and likeness of God, which is nothing else 
 than this wisdom and righteousness embodied in man, which might ap- 
 prehend God, and in which God might be reflected, i. e., these gifts 
 were bestowed upon man, viz., the knowledge of God, the fear of God, 
 confidence in God, and like blessings. Paul also (Col. 3, Eph. 4) 
 shows that the image of God consists in the knowledge of God, right- 
 eousness, and truth." 
 
 Chmn. (Loc. Th., I, 227) : u Original righteousness was not only the 
 receiving, but also the rectitude and soundness, of all the powers. 
 Original righteousness consisted not only in an equable temperament of 
 the body, but especially in the rectitude of the powers of the soul. 
 Original righteousness comprehended not only the second table of the 
 law, but also the first. Nor did it consist only in external actions, or 
 the inferior powers of man. This is, in substance, all that the earliest 
 divines say concerning the state of integrity. The view which has been 
 given in the text belongs to a later period. 
 
 Concerning the expression original righteousness, C alov '. remarks in 
 addition (IV, 598) : " It is called righteousness, not as this virtue is dis- 
 tinguished from others (which is called particular righteousness), but as 
 general righteousness, in the common acceptation, which, however, is here 
 understood in a higher sense, comprehending not only all moral, but also 
 spiritual virtues, not merely those which relate to the will, but those also 
 which have respect to the intellectual powers ; because by this term is 
 now meant, according to the use of theological writers, that universal, 
 and by far the most delightful agreement, ov/iQavia, in the first man, of 
 mind, will, and heart, with the intellect, will, and heart of God. Nor 
 is this term improperly used, for that original perfection of nature is 
 called righteousness, both in respect of its essence, because we are indeed 
 accustomed to call that righteous, which by its own nature is true, per- 
 fect, right, sound, and incorrupt ; but also in respect of its efficiency, 
 because it made man righteous in the sight of God, i. e., innocent, ac- 
 
ORIGINAL RIGHTEOUSNESS. 235 
 
 ceptable, and holy. Righteousness is called original, both because it 
 was first of all in man, and because from the beginning he possessed it 
 after the manner of a concreated habit, and also in order that the right- 
 eousness of man's original and first state may be distinguished from 
 moral, imputed, and imperfect righteousness, from that which is per- 
 fected in another life, and from every other kind whatsoever ; and, 
 finally, because it must needs be transmitted to posterity by natural 
 generation, inasmuch as in a state of innocence men would obtain this 
 natural perfection with their origin, just as now, in a state of sin, origi- 
 nal sin is propagated, and from that very propagation is called original." 
 Calov. (IV, 597) defines original righteousness to be "a habit of wis- 
 dom created in the mind, and of perfect holiness and purity in the 
 natural desires and heart, in virtue of which our first parents, by natural 
 illumination, knew the truth, even that which was spiritual, without 
 error and doubt, and were freely inclined, by natural propensity, to that 
 which is good, and promptly, without any struggle of internal affections, 
 accomplished what they wished." 
 
 [14] Many divines include these excellences in their definition of 
 image ; yet they make a distinction between " the image partly received 
 (fiepiicibs), which denotes knowledge and original righteousness, and the 
 image wholly received (6?uKcjg), which embraces all things that complete 
 the image of God." The excellences of the first class they call " the 
 principal perfections, whose seat is the soul;" those of the second class 
 are called u the less principal, whose seat is the body." The latter class 
 Quen. (II, 7) divides into those which are partly in man and partly 
 without him. If these excellences are included in the definition of the 
 image of God, then the following is of value in reference to the differ- 
 ence between the image of God and original righteousness, Quen. (II 
 3) : " The image of God and original righteousness differ as the whole 
 and a part. The image of God includes as well the principal as the 
 secondary conformity with God; but original righteousness is ordinarily 
 received as embracing only the principal conformity." 
 
 [15] (a) Holl. (475) proves impassibility in the following manner: 
 " Painful and destructive sufferings are the punishment of sin (Gen. 3 : 
 16; Sirach 38: 15); wherefore the first man, being without sin, was 
 free from its bitter suffering." 
 
 Quen. (II, 7) remarks on this point : " The first men in the state of 
 innocency had a body incapable of suffering, inasmuch as it was not ex- 
 posed to those things which could have injured their natural disposition, 
 and could have contributed to the death and corruption of the body. 
 Such things were a freedom from all injuries arising from pain and 
 
236 THE STATE OF INTEGRITY. 
 
 trouble, special protection against rains, winds, heat, diseases, etc., 
 etc., and other inconveniences, which now, since the fall, are innumer- 
 able (Gen. 2: 2o). Meanwhile, however, if man had remained in 
 his integrity, physical changes would not have been wanting, such as 
 generation, nutrition, etc., and he would have needed food and drink 
 for his sustentation." 
 
 (b) Immortality. Quen. (II, 7) : " It is proved from Gen. 2:17; 
 Rom. 5: 12; 6: 23." 
 
 " We must distinguish (1) between the immortality which denotes ab- 
 solute freedom from the power and act of dying (and thus God is im- 
 mortal, and angels, our souls, and the bodies of the redeemed and the 
 damned), and (2) the immortality which denotes a freedom from the 
 proximate power of dying and the natural tendency to death, and, at the 
 same time, from the act of dying, in such a manner, however, that 
 death could happen upon a certain proposed condition ; and such was 
 man's immortality in his state of integrity. We must make a distinc- 
 tion between absolute freedom from death which will exist in another life, 
 and a conditional or decreed freedom, which existed in the first state of 
 man (viz., as long as he would not sin), and which did not exclude but 
 included the use of food and drink, and especially the eating of the tree 
 of life, by which means our first parents were enabled, in a natural way, 
 to perpetuate life. It is one thing not to be able to die, and another to be 
 able not to die, and still another not to be able not to die. The last be- 
 longs to all sinners, the second to Adam in his state of integrity, and 
 the first to the blessed." (II, 8.) 
 
 (c) Dominion. Holl. (475) : " (a) God granted to the first man 
 dominion over sublunary things, extending over seas and lands, but not 
 over the stars of heaven, except as far as he converted their influence to 
 his own advantage, (b) That dominion was not absolute and direct, 
 but relative and useful, which denotes the inhabiting of the earth, with 
 the use of its fruits, (c) Dominion is received either in its etymological 
 signification for the right and power of ruling, or formally for actual 
 riding. In the former sense, it is the less principal part of the image of 
 God ; in the latter it was an external accident or addition to that image." 
 
 Br. (297) cites some more corporeal excellences, viz.: " But God 
 bestowed upon man in respect of his body also a certain image of him- 
 self, inasmuch as not only the perfections of the soul expressed them- 
 selves through the external acts of the body, but, in addition, the mem- 
 bers themselves, of the organic body, have a certain analogy to the 
 divine attributes, viz.: the countenance, erect towards heaven, furnishes 
 a semblance of the divine majesty ; but particularly the immortal body, 
 
man's original condition. 237 
 
 or that which could endure forever and remain free from every corrup- 
 tion, bears, according to the intention of God, a resemblance to the 
 divine immortality." Yet Baier perceives that not all these excellences 
 were lost by the fall, and reckons these in part, therefore, as belonging 
 to the image of God generically received. ■ 
 
 [16] Therefore the original condition of man is called a most happy 
 one. Quen. (II, 2): "The happiness of it appeared (1) from the con- 
 dition of the soul, which was wise and holy ; (2) from the condition of 
 the body, which was beautiful, not susceptible of suffering, and immor- 
 tal; (3) from the condition of life-, which was happy and blessed; (4) 
 from the condition of his habitation, which was most pleasant, truly a 
 garden of pleasure, which is called Paradise." 
 
 Grh. (IV, 247) : " Hence it happened that man, joyful, blessed, and 
 contented, delighted in God, his creator, there being in him neither 
 fear, nor terror, nor sadness." 
 
 [17] Br. (296) : " Therefore also this divine image was a natural en- 
 dowment, or it belonged naturally to man, so that he might rightly per- 
 form his connatural acts ; since, in the absence of this, his nature would 
 not have been pure, but impure." 
 
 Holl. (477) : " The image of God did not, indeed, constitute the 
 nature of the first man, after the manner of an essential part, nor did 
 it emanate from his nature, per se and necessarily, as if properly insep- 
 arable from it ; yet it was natural to the first man, because by creation 
 it began to exist with his very nature, and thus it both belonged to him 
 and was deeply impressed in him, and also thoroughly perfected the nature 
 of man in his state of integrity, so that he could attain his end, and it 
 could be propagated to posterity by natural generation." 
 
 The different significations in which the word natural is used are, ac- 
 cording to Quen. (II, 9), the following: " Anything is said to be na- 
 tural (1) by constitution (constitutive), viz., that which constitutes a* 
 nature itself, and is either the nature itself, or an essential part of it, as 
 soul and body ; (2) by sequence (consecutive), viz., that which follows 
 nature, and flows essentially from its form, as the faculties of the soul, 
 teachableness, etc.; (3) subjectively (subjective), viz., that which ad- 
 heres most closely to nature as a natural property ; (4) by way of per- 
 fecting (perfective), viz., that which perfects and adorns it internally ; 
 (5) by way of transfer (transitive), viz., that which is propagated na- 
 turally along with the nature to others. When we say that primeval 
 righteousness was natural or connatural to Adam, we do not understand 
 the word natural in the first or second sense, but only in the third, fourth, 
 and fifth, viz., on account of a natural inhesion, perfection, and propaga- 
 tion" 
 
238 NO DONUM SUPER ADDITUM. 
 
 Original righteousness is,' therefore, not a supernatural gift, for " that 
 is supernatural which does not belong to nature from its origin, but by- 
 special grace is superadded by God to supply its imperfection." If 
 original righteousness, then, were said to be a superadded gift, that would 
 conflict with Gen. 1:31. 
 
 Holl. (478): " Antithesis of the Papists, who maintain that the image 
 of God was a supernatural gift superadded to man for the purpose of sup- 
 plementing his connatural imperfection, as a wreath or garment adorns a 
 man externally, and as the rein restrains the horse. But as the nature 
 of man and of the horse remains incorrupt when the garment and the rein 
 are removed, thus they suppose that the nature of man was not corrupted 
 by the fall, the image of God having been removed, but that it remained 
 upright." 
 
 Together with this assertion is also rejected the other concerning the 
 status purorum naturalium. (See Note 2.) 
 
 [18] On this point the Dogmaticians are not agreed. Grh., Cal., 
 Quen., and others call the gracious indwelling of the Trinity, etc., a 
 supernatural gift ; others, as Holl., understand this also as a natural 
 gift. Holl. (484): " There are, indeed, some theologians of great rep- 
 utation who think that the grace of God and the indwelling of the most 
 Holy Trinity were supernatural to the first man. Yet if we consider 
 (1) that the nature of the first man never was nor ever could be upright 
 without the indwelling and sanctification of the Holy Spirit ; (2) that 
 original sin, which came into the place of the divine image after the fall 
 of Adam, introduced into fallen man not only corporeal but also spirit- 
 ual death (which consists in the deprivation of the mystical union of the 
 soul with God), we agree with those authors who decide that divine 
 grace and the indwelling of the most Holy Trinity were not supernatu- 
 ral, but natural to the first man." 
 
 On the other hand, Holl. (ib.) points out as supernatural gifts " ex- 
 traordinary revelation and that which is connected with it (viz., positive 
 law and supernatural strength to fulfill it)." 
 

 OF SIN IN GENERAL. 239 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 Of the State of Corruption. 
 
 " The State of Corruption is that condition into which man vol- 
 untarily precipitated himself by his own departure from the chief 
 good, thus becoming both wicked and miserable." Quen. (II, 48). 
 
 r I ^HIS state was brought about by sin, and we have, therefore, 
 -*- here to treat : (1) of sin in general. (2) Of the particular 
 sin by which this state was brought about, as well as of the state 
 itself. (3) Of the actual sins proceeding from it; and finally, (4) 
 Of the powers yet remaining in man after the fall, or, of the ques- 
 tion to what extent man yet possesses freedom of the will. 
 
 § 25. Of Sin in General. 
 
 According to 1 John 3 : 4, sin is every deviation from a law 
 of God (Holl., 488 : " Sin is a deviation from the divine law"), 
 whether that law be written in our hearts, or be communicated 
 externally by positive precept. [1] It can proceed only from a* 
 being endowed with reason and free will. But from this general 
 conception of sin it does not, therefore, necessarily follow, that 
 every such act, which may be a deviation from the law of Cod, 
 must be performed with the consciousness and purpose that such 
 a deviation from the law of God shall take place. [2] God is in 
 no sense the author of sin ; he did not create sin in man, since of 
 all that was created, it is said that it was good (Gen. 1 : 31): 
 neither did he decree that at any particular time man should be- 
 come a sinner. He has neither urged man on to that which is 
 sinful (James 1 : 13), neither did he approve of sin when it en- 
 tered. Much rather does he hate it at all times (Ps. 5:5; Zach. 
 8 : 17 ; 1 John 2 : 16.) [3] The origin of sin lies, therefore, only 
 in the will of the creature who, of his own accord, departed from 
 God, and acted in opposition to the divine command. [4] And 
 here Satan made the beginning, and then also led man astray to 
 sin. [5] 
 
240 THE STATE OF CORRUPTION. 
 
 The immediate consequence of sin is that the sinner, who 
 broke the commandment which he was bound to obey, incurred 
 guilt which deserves punishment. Holl. (502): "The conse- 
 quence of sin is responsibility for guilt and liability to punish- 
 ment." [6] The punishment is partly temporal, partly eternal. 
 
 [1] Br. 388 seq.): " By the law is to be understood the eternal and 
 immutable wisdom and decision of God concerning those things which 
 belong or do not belong to a rational creature, as far as he is such, 
 united with his will, that they may or may not be done. This law was 
 promulgated at first in the very creation of man, when there was be- 
 stowed upon him the knowledge of practical principles, and the ability 
 to apply them to all actions and the circumstances of actions. After 
 these perfections (which had before, by virtue of the divine image, been 
 received) had been lost by the fall, the law was indeed very much oblit- 
 erated, yet certain vestiges or marks of it have remained ; but God, 
 besides other revelations, repeated especially in the decalogue the sum 
 of the law, both in an oral and written form, and explained more clearly 
 each precept throughout the Sacred Scriptures. But that also is truly 
 sin, which is committed against any positive law, whether divine or 
 human ; provided that the human law be not contrary to the divine. " 
 
 [2] Holl. (497): "A sinner is a rational creature, endowed with a 
 free will, and subject to the divine law, who departs from it, by doing 
 what it forbids, and neglecting what it enjoins." (501): " That which 
 is voluntary (to knovoiov), does not enter into the definition of sin gener- 
 ically considered. Sin is called voluntary, either subjectively, as far as 
 it inheres in the will, or effectively, according as it proceeds from a de- 
 liberate volition. Not every sin is voluntary in the latter mode. Sin 
 is called voluntary, either formally, which is committed by one's own 
 volition, or virtually, which was voluntary in the root and stock of the 
 human race, from which i( has been propagated to posterity, whose will 
 would have been the same as that in Adam, had they lived at the same 
 time with him " [i. e., sin may be voluntary, when not volitionary]. 
 
 [3] Mel. (Loc. Th., 56): " God is not the cause of sin, nor is sin a 
 thing contrived or ordained by him, but it is a horrible destruction of 
 the divine work and order." 
 
 Chmn. (Loc. Th., I, 146): "The explanation also must be noted, of 
 what is intended when it is said that God is not the cause of sin, viz., 
 that he neither desires nor approves of sin, neither does he influence the 
 will to sin. For some understand that he is not the author of sin in 
 such a sense, as in the beginning to create it, or to have it in himself, 
 
THE CAUSE OF SIX. 241 
 
 or to produce it through himself; but that men sin nevertheless by the 
 will of God, and that God produces sins not only permissively, but also 
 efficiently, in men and by men ; yet he is not therefore to be called the 
 author of sin. Therefore is added, as if for the sake of explanation: 
 author and cause of sin." 
 
 Quex. (II, 49): "God is in no manner the efficient cause of sin; 
 neither in part nor in whole, neither directly nor indirectly, neither ac- 
 cidentally per se nor whether in the form of Adam's transgression or in 
 that of any other sin, God is not, neither can he be called the cause or 
 author of sin. God is not the cause of sin, (1) physically and per se, 
 because thus the evil or sin has no cause ; (2) not morally, by com- 
 manding, persuading, or approving, because he does not desire sin, but 
 hates it ; nor (3) by way of accident, because nothing can happen to 
 God either by chance or fortuitously. This conflicts with the divine 
 wisdom, prescience, goodness, holiness, and independence, as is proved 
 from Ps. 5:5; 45 : 7 ; Is. 65 : 12 ; Zach. 8 : 17 ; 1 John 1:5; James 
 1:13,17." 
 
 How God stands related to sin was shown in the discussion on the 
 concurrence. 
 
 [4] Quex. (II, 49): "Whatever want of conformity to law (avo/nia) 
 there ever is in a rational agent, must be ascribed to the free will of the 
 creature itself, being spontaneously deficient in acting. Ps. 5:5; Hos. 
 13 : 9 ; Matt. 23: 37. A rational agent, or creature, which possesses 
 reason, and the power of knowing those things which the law given 
 either commands or forbids, is properly said to be the cause of sin, viz., 
 the will of the devil and of man. But this rational agent ought to be 
 viewed, not in respect of any real influence, but in respect of a defi- 
 ciency; for sin has rather a deficient than an efficient cause."* 
 
 [5] Coxf. Aug. (19): "Concerning the cause of sin, they teach that 
 although God creates and preserves nature, yet the cause of sin is the 
 will of the wicked, namely, the devil and impious men, which without 
 the assistance of God turns itself away from God." 
 
 Chmx. (Loc. Th., I, 148): " The devil is the first author of sin : (1) 
 because by his own free will he turned himself from God ; (2) because 
 he is the cause of sin in the human race in this way, that he deceived 
 and seduced Eve in the state of integrity, so that she departed from 
 God." 
 
 [6] Holl. (502): " Guilt is a moral foulness or deformity, resulting 
 from an act inconsistent with the law, and unworthy of a rational crea- 
 
 *Cf. Chap. IV. Note 13. 
 
242 THE STATE OF CORRUPTION. 
 
 ture, and inhering in the sinner as a shameful stain. Responsibility for 
 guilt (reatus culpce) is an obligation, by which man, on account of an 
 act inconsistent with the moral law, is held, as if bound, under sin and 
 its blemish, so that in consequence of this act, the sinner is regarded and 
 pronounced detestable. ,, 
 
 " The divine punishment is a grievous evil by which God the offended 
 judge punishes the guilt before incurred, and not yet forgiven, so as to 
 display his justice and majesty, and vindicate from contempt the author- 
 ity of the law. Liability to punishment (reatus parnce), is an obligation 
 by which the sinner is held bound, by God the offended judge, to endure 
 the punishment of the unforgiven guilt. Guilt differs from punishment. 
 The former precedes, the latter follows. Guilt deserves punishment ; 
 punishment is due to guilt, and is, as it were, its wages. Rom. 6 : 23. 
 Guilt proceeds from the will ; the will of the sinner revolts from punish- 
 ment. The sinner contracts guilt by his acts ; he endures punishment 
 by suffering." 
 
 § 26. Man's First Transgression, and the State thereby produced, 
 viz., Original Sin. 
 
 It was the first of the human family who committed the first 
 sin. These, seduced, by Satan, under the form of a serpent, of 
 their own free will, transgressed the prohibition of God (Gen. 2 : 
 16, 17) to eat of the tree of knowledge, [lj Holl. (507) : "The 
 first sin of men is the transgression of the law of Paradise, by 
 which, our first parents, having been persuaded by the devil, and 
 having abused the freedom of the will, violated the divine pro- 
 hibition concerning the not eating the fruit of the tree of the 
 knowledge of good and evil, and brought down upon themselves 
 and their posterity, the divine image having been lost, a great 
 guilt, and the liability to temporal and eternal punishment." [2] 
 In consequence of this transgression, our first parents burdened 
 themselves with a guilt which deserved punishment ; therefore 
 also God immediately inflicted upon them (Gen. 2 : 17) the pun- 
 ishment threatened in the event of transgression. [3] The con- 
 sequence of their sin then was, that their whole relation to God, 
 and their corporeal, spiritual, and moral state were changed. 
 The state of righteousness, above described, ceased to exist, and, 
 in its place, was introduced a state of moral depravity, [4] which 
 must therefore be transmitted to all their posterity ; since they 
 
ORIGINAL SIN. 243 
 
 who are begotten after the common course of nature cannot be 
 introduced into a different state from that of their parents at the 
 time when they beget them, so that the first sin, in its results, 
 affects not only our first parents, but also all their posterity. [5] * 
 Since, therefore, they incurred the divine wrath by reason of sin, 
 so also are all mankind, descended from them, in a similar state; 
 and that, too, for two reasons; first, because the state of deprav- 
 ity, which they have derived from their first parents, renders its 
 subjects the objects of God's wrath; [6] secondly, because all the 
 descendants of Adam are represented and contained in him, as 
 the representative of the human family, therefore, that which was 
 done by Adam can be regarded as the act of all, the consequences 
 of which also must be borne by all, so that Adam's sin also is 
 imputed to his posterity, i. e., it is regarded as their own sin, be- 
 cause they are all represented in Adam. [7] The state of de- 
 pravity which followed Adam's transgression, and which now 
 belongs to our first parents, as well as to all their posterity, is 
 designated by the expression original sin. [8] Holl. (518): 
 " Original sin is the thorough corruption of human nature, which, 
 by the fall of our first parents, is deprived of original righteous- 
 ness, and is prone to every evil. 11 [9] According to its single parts, 
 it is described, (1) as the want of original righteousness, which 
 ought to exist in man ; (2) as carnal concupiscence, or inclination 
 to evil. [10] In the place of original holiness and purity, there 
 came directly the opposite, a state thoroughly sinful and desirous 
 of that which is evil, which in itself is sin, so that, in consequence 
 of this constant propensity to evil, and not originally on account 
 of actual transgressions proceeding from it, man is an object of 
 the divine displeasure. [11] This depraved state, then, is not 
 only the foundation and fountain of all actual transgressions, but 
 also has, as its consequence, the wrath of God and temporal and 
 eternal punishment. [12] 
 
 Concerning this state, finally, it must be asserted, that it is 
 natural to us in that sense in which this is said of original right- 
 eousness in the state of integrity. Were this state different, man 
 would not cease to be man, and hence it does not constitute man's 
 essence, but is connected with the essence, or the nature of man 
 as he is now born, and that too in the most intimate and insep- 
 
214 THE STATE OF CORRUPTION. 
 
 arable manner; and as no man is now born, except in that de- 
 praved state, so also this state can never be lost by man, as long 
 as he lives on the earth. Man, when he becomes a partaker of 
 the Holy Ghost, can indeed refuse obedience to his evil propen- 
 sity ; and, when redemption through Christ is apprehended by 
 faith, he is also freed from the consequences of sin, i. e., the wrath 
 of God and punishment ; but yet the evil inclination to sin always 
 remains in him. All this is expressed in the adjuncts of original 
 sin, which Quen. thus enumerates (II, 62): 
 
 1. Natural inherence, Heb. 12: 1; Eom. 7: 21, which, there- 
 fore, is not a substance, but an accident. [13] 
 
 2. Natural transmissibility, Gen. 5:3; Job 14: 4; Ps. 51; 6; 
 John 3: 6; Eph. 2 : 3. [14] 
 
 3. Duration (a tenacity or obstinate inherence during life, 
 Eom. 7: 17; Heb. 12: 1). [15] 
 
 [1] Quen. (II, 51) : " The first sin in the human race is the volun- 
 tary apostasy of our first parents from God their creator, by which, 
 having been seduced by the devil, they transgressed, of their own accord, 
 both the general divine and internal law impressed upon their mind, 
 and the particular external prohibition concerning the not eating of the 
 fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil ; concerning the ex- 
 istence of which sin, the history contained in Gen. 3, does not permit 
 us to doubt. By Paul it is called the transgression of Adam, Rom. 5 : 
 14, because he transgressed the divine precept by eating of the for- 
 bidden fruit. The fall is ascribed to Adam by way of eminence, both 
 because he was the head of the woman, and also because he was the be- 
 ginning and root of the human race, from whom, as the source, sin 
 descended to posterity. For a like reason it is called a transgression of 
 one, Eom. 5 : 15, 17, and 18, where by one man the Apostle under- 
 stands Adam particularly, so, however, as not entirely to exclude Eve." 
 Hence arise the following definitions : 
 
 Quen. (II, 51). (a) " The external first and principal (but remote) 
 cause of this sin is Satan, acting here, not by internal impulse, nor by 
 external violence (for each is repugnant to the integrity of the state in 
 which man was originally created), but by mere external moral suasion. 
 John 8 : 44; 2 Cor. 11 : 3 ; Rev. 12 : 9. 
 
 (b) " The instrumental cause is a true and natural serpent, but pos- 
 sessed by the devil, Gen. 3 : 1, 14 (not a mere serpent, but one possessed 
 by the devil, as is manifest from the conversation and discourse with 
 
THE FIRST SIN. 245 
 
 Eve, and also from the punishment, Gen. 3 : 15. For the bruising of 
 the serpent's head by the seed of the woman, which was to follow, has 
 respect, not to a natural, but to the infernal serpent)." 
 
 (c) " TJie internal and directly efficient cause is the intellect and will 
 of the first man, arising, not from any internal defect, which could not 
 be in an unfallen state, but by way of accident, in consequence of his 
 wandering and departure from God, through seduction from without. 
 (Man did not fall in consequence of any absence or denial of any special 
 grace, nor from the presence of any internal languor and natural defect, 
 but through the accidental abuse of his liberty, while his will yielded 
 to the external persuasion and seduction of the devil, and interrupted 
 the gracious influence of God.)" 
 
 (d) The order and mode of the seduction are the following : Holl. 
 (511) : " Eve was first and immediately seduced by the devil (Holl. 
 (505) : Eve sinned first, not because she was more feeble in intellect 
 than Adam, but because she was more yielding in will), while Adam 
 was drawn mediately and by the persuasion of the woman, into the 
 same sin, and thus the fall of Adam is referred also to the devil, as the 
 first author of sin." In reference to the passage, 1 Tim. 2 : 14, Quen. 
 remarks (II, 53) : " These words are not to be understood of the se- 
 duction simply, but of the mode and order of the seduction ; seduction 
 is either external, through the address of the serpent from without, or 
 internal, through the suggestion of Satan from within. In the former 
 sense Eve only, and not Adam, was seduced." 
 
 (e) The particular sinful acts which the transgression involves are : 
 Holl. (510): "(a), on the part of the intellect, a want of faith (incred- 
 ulitas), (Eve hesitated between the word of God, Gen. 2 : 17, and the 
 word of the devil, Gen. 3 : 4); (&), on the part of the will, selfishness and 
 pride, Gen. 3:5; (c), on the part of the sensuous appetite, an inordinate 
 desire for the forbidden fruit, Gen. 3 : 6, from which came forth the ex- 
 ternal act forbidden by the law of Paradise." 
 
 [2] Holl. (509); " Our first parents, by their fall, immediately vio- 
 lated the positive law given in Paradise, forbidding to eat of the fruit of 
 the tree of the knowledge of good and evil ; mediately and really by their 
 disobedience they broke through the restraints of the entire moral law. 
 The intention of the positive law was a trial or test of disobedience, 
 which, as due to God, the whole moral law demands. But he who fears 
 not to transgress one precept of the law, will not blush to violate the re- 
 mainder, since they have the same author and the same obligatory 
 force." 
 
 [3] Holl. (512, 513): " The consequence of Adam's fall is the re- 
 
246 THE STATE OF CORRUPTION. 
 
 sponsibility for guilt and liability to punishment (reatus culpce et pcence.) 
 Punishment, like an inseparable companion, follows closely upon guilt. 
 God, the most holy, had threatened death to man, if he transgressed the 
 law which was given him. Gen. 2 : 17. By death was meant spiritual, 
 corporeal, and eternal death. Spiritual death, the root of all evil, is the 
 immediate consequence of the first sin. For, as soon as man turned his 
 heart away from the divine law, he deprived himself of spiritual union 
 with God, who is the life of the soul, and thus, having been deserted by 
 God, he died spiritually. This spiritual death brought with it the loss of 
 the divine image, the entire corruption of the whole human nature, and 
 the loss of free will in spiritual things. The death of the body follows spir- 
 itual death, or the death of the soul, including all the diseases and mis- 
 eries by which man is surrounded from without. Whither also are to 
 be referred the severe and burdensome labor which must be constantly 
 endured by the man, Gen. 3 : 17, and the painful throes of parturition 
 in the woman, Gen. 3 : 16. Although our first parents did not suffer the 
 death of the body as soon as they fell, nevertheless from that time they be- 
 came subject to death, since this is the wages of sin, Rom. 6 : 23. JSter- 
 temal death is a perpetual exclusion from the beatific enjoyment of God, 
 united with constant and most excruciating torments, which, by the 
 force of the threatening annexed to the divine law, Adam and all his 
 posterity must have suffered, unless Jesus Christ, the Redeemer of the 
 human race and the restorer of the lost image of God, had interposed." 
 
 [4] Chmn. (Loc. Th., (I, 227): " For this, too, is the misery of origi- 
 nal sin, that not only the image itself of God was lost, but also the knowl- 
 edge of him was nearly extinguished." Kg. (80): " The effects of the 
 first sin, in respect of our first parents , are : the total loss of the divine 
 image, some fragments, indeed, or vestiges remaining ; also the most 
 profound depravity of the whole nature ; exposure to punishment ex- 
 pressed in the penalty annexed to the law of Paradise ; the griefs and 
 miseries of this life, and finally death itself." 
 
 [5] Grh. (IV, 315): "We must not regard the sin of our first 
 parents and its consequences, as if they had respect only to them, and 
 did not in any way affect us ; because afterwards Adam begat a son, in 
 his own image and likeness, Gen. 5 : 3. As he was, such also did he be- 
 get his children, despoiled of the image of God, destitute of original right- 
 eousness, subject to sin, to the wrath of God, to death and damnation. 
 Adam lived, and we all lived in him. Adam perished, and we all per- 
 ished in him. As when parents lose the possession of a feudal benefit, 
 the male children also lose it, because the parents received it not only for 
 themselves, but also for their children ; so also our first parents, having 
 
ALL MEN SINNED IN ADAM. 247 
 
 been created in the image of God, had received those gifts which were 
 bestowed by the goodness of God, like a deposit, to be faithfully guarded 
 for themselves and their posterity; thus also, by sinning, they lost 
 them, not only for themselves, but for all their posterity." 
 
 Holl. (523): " Our first parents are the proximate cause of this orig- 
 inal blemish, from whose impure blood the original stain has flowed into 
 our hearts. Everything follows the seeds of its own nature. No black 
 crow ever produces a white dove ; nor ferocious lion a gentle lamb ; and 
 no man polluted with inborn sin ever begets a holy child." 
 
 [6] Br. (403) says, referring to Rom. 5: 12 : " Therefore we must 
 say that all sinned in one, inasmuch as, he having sinned, it came to pass 
 that all who should be naturally descended from him would necessarily 
 be born with sin, and thus every one on account of his own sin would 
 become, in his very birth, liable to death, see Eph. 2:3; so that, when 
 all men are said to be children of wrath, the cause of this guilt is taken 
 for granted, namely, because all by nature are sinners. For to be a son 
 of wrath is the same as to be liable to divine wrath, and worthy of pun- 
 ishment, on account of the violation of the law, to be inflicted by God, 
 the vindicator of the iaw. Therefore, one could not be by nature a child 
 of wrath, unless he were polluted by sin in his own nature or by the cor- 
 ruption of his nature." But Br. also adds (414): " It is not necessary, 
 neither, perhaps, is it wise, that we should pryingly inquire how could 
 God so impute the sin of our first parents to their posterity, not yet in 
 existence, that they should for this reason necessarily be born destitute 
 of original righteousness, and sinners ? For it is enough that the fact 
 (to 6™) is revealed, although the explanation of it (to 71-67) be un- 
 known." 
 
 Grh. (IV, 316): "Therefore that sin (of Adam) is not in all re- 
 spects foreign to us, because Adam did not sin as a private man, but as 
 the head of the whole human race ; and as human nature was commu- 
 nicated through him, so also natural corruption was similarly propa- 
 gated" . . . (327): " Because, therefore, all who are born in the natu- 
 ral and common course of generation are under sin, so also all are by 
 nature children of wrath, liable to death and damnation ; for it is not 
 possible that God should not be angry at sin." 
 
 [7] Holl. (513): " The first sin of Adam, since he is regarded as the 
 common parent, head, root, and representative of the whole race, is truly 
 and justly imputed by God, for guilt and punishment, to all his posterity." 
 By the sin that is imputed to us is understood (Quen., II, 111): " That 
 disobedience by which the first parents of the human race turned them- 
 selves away from God," etc. Therefore, also, it is said (II, 53): " Not 
 
248 THE STATE OF CORRUPTION. 
 
 only our first parents were the subject of the first sin, but also all their 
 posterity to be propagated by natural generation. For Adam and Eve 
 were substitutes for the whole human race, inasmuch as they ought to 
 be regarded as both the natural (i. <?., seminal) and also the moral source 
 of the human race, namely, of the entire progeny in nature and grace. 
 Hence the apostle properly says, Rom. 5 : 12, fy w, in whom, viz., in the 
 first man, all have sinned, or in that, because that, one sinned, all sinned, 
 viz., in Adam, who represented the persons of all his posterity; and v. 
 19, 'by one man's disobedience many were made sinners.' That is to 
 say, we have been made sinners through the sin of Adam, not by mere 
 interpretation, nor even by limitation, but by the imputation of real 
 guilt, and the propagation of natural depravity, and the participation of 
 an actual crime. And thus the proximate cause why, when the first 
 man sinned, all his posterity sinned, is the existence of the whole human 
 species in the person of our first parent, Rom. 5 : 12. For our first 
 parents were then considered not only as the first individuals of the 
 human race, but also as the true root, stock, and source of the whole 
 human race, which in them could both stand and fall. Hence we are 
 said to have been in the loins of oar first parents." Id. (II, 111) : 
 " The first sin is considered — I. With regard to Adam himself, who by 
 one transgression involved all his posterity in crime, in guilt, in punish- 
 ment ; in so far, namely, as his will was the interpreter of the wills of 
 all of them who, as the Scriptures say, were in his loins, whose own act 
 the sin interpretatively is, so that they are born with the absence of the 
 perfection that should exist. The will, I say, of Adam, as the source 
 and root of the human race, was considered as ours, not formally, but 
 interpretatively. For the first man had the wills of all his posterity 
 gathered up, as it were, in his own will ; whence, for himself and all his 
 posterity, he declared his will and that of his posterity against the law 
 that had been given. II. "With regard to God, as the Judge who, ac- 
 cording to his mighty power, justly punishes the crime against the divine 
 majesty also in the posterity, namely, those fallen in Adam, by the want, 
 in so far, of original righteousness, and thus most justly imputes to them 
 the sin of Adam unto condemnation." Quen., however, distinguishes 
 between immediate and mediate imputation (II, 114): "The first 
 Adamitic sin is immediately imputed to us so far as we existed hereto- 
 fore in Adam. But the sin of Adam is mediately imputed to us, viz., 
 as original sin is mediately inherent in us, so far as we are regarded in 
 our own persons and individually. For no one is considered as a sin- 
 ner by God, to no one is that first act imputed, except to him who 
 descends, contaminated with original sin, from that same Adam." 
 
IMPUTATION OF ORIGINAL SIN. 249 
 
 The word to impute, Quen. explains thus (II, 111): "The word im- 
 putation in this place is received not physically, for implanting or in- 
 serting, but relatively for estimating. In the Hebrew language it is 
 explained by 3&JTf» m tne Greek D y toyi&odcu, and in the German by 
 
 T 
 
 zurechnen; as if you would say, in computing, that you set something 
 over to some one, or in counting or calculating, that you assign some- 
 thing." Imputation is proved from Rom. 5: 12, 14, 19. The common 
 explanation of the first passage is: "in whom, viz., Adam, all have 
 sinned." But Quen. remarks (II, 58) that "it makes little difference 
 whether you translate kf L, in whom, or on which account. For, if it is 
 retained as causal, it confirms our view. For thus we argue : They who 
 die, die because they have sinned ; but all mankind die, even infants 
 and those not yet born. Therefore, they die because they have sinned." 
 "But infants and those not yet born, die either on account of some fault 
 {delictum) of their own or of an actual transgression ; therefore, on ac- 
 count of the actual transgression of another, scil. : of Adam, who tainted 
 them with his own stain. But if the other signification be received, 
 i. e., (in quo) relatively in Adam, as root, fountain, cause, head, it is 
 again proved that Adam's sin is imputed to all." In reference to Rom. 
 5: 19, Quen. remarks (II, 113) : "As we are made righteous by the 
 imputation of the righteousness of Christ, so were we made unrighteous 
 by the disobedience of Adam." 
 
 In order to express himself with entire accuracy, Quen. remarks, in 
 addition (II, 53), that the phrase, " the fall of Adam," is taken in dif- 
 ferent senses. The one sense is " Specifically a transgression in relation 
 to the forbidden tree," and therefore it is, " Formally considered, the 
 sin of the individual Adam ;" in this case we say, "The fall becomes 
 ours by imputation only." The other sense is, " That also which flowed 
 from this transgression, viz., the want of original righteousness, and the 
 corruption of the whole nature ;" and then we must say, "It passes 
 over to posterity, not only by imputation, but also by natural genera- 
 tion." We remark, in addition, that the doctrine of the imputation of 
 the guilt and punishment of our first parents was fully developed only 
 by the later Theologians, from about the time of Calovius, but an in- 
 timation of it appears in the Form. Conc. (Sol. Dec, I, 9) : " That 
 fault or liability, whereby it comes to pass that we all, because of the 
 disobedience of Adam and Eve, are under God's abhorrence and are by 
 nature children of wrath." 
 
 [8] The Scholastics distinguished original sin, originating, from origi- 
 nal sin, originated. Quen. (II, 115) : " Active, or originating original 
 sin, is that vicious act which our first parents committed, by transgress- 
 17 
 
250 THE STATE OF CORRUPTION. 
 
 ing the paradisaic law, which act, indeed, has not passed over to their 
 posterity, nor is it found in them, except by imputation only. However, 
 it gave origin to the deep corruption of man, which is called passive or 
 originated original sin, which is a vicious habit, contracted by Adam 
 through that actual transgression of the divine law, and propagated to 
 his posterity." The word is here used in the latter sense. 
 
 Holl. (518) : " In ecclesiastical phraseology, not biblical, this sin, de- 
 rived from the fall of Adam, is called original, and indeed, not in re- 
 spect of the origin of the world or of man, but (1) because derived 
 from Adam, the root and beginning of the human race ; (2) because it 
 was united with the origin of the descendants of Adam ; (3) because 
 it is the origin and fountain of actual transgressions." 
 
 "In the language of Scripture, this connate depravity is called : (1) 
 indwelling sin, Rom. 7:17, because after the fall it fixed its seat firmly 
 in man, nor departs from him until the habitation of soul and body is 
 dissolved ; (2) besetting sin, because it surrounds us on all sides, like a 
 long garment impeding a runner, Heb. 12:1; (3) a law in the mem- 
 bers, Rom. 7 : 23. For as a law rules and governs an agent, thus orig- 
 inal sin directs the members of the body to the perpetration of wicked 
 deeds ; (4) an evil lying near, Rom. 7 : 21, because like a chain it clings 
 to a man who wishes to do good." 
 
 [9] More extended definitions. Holl. (518): " Original sin is a 
 want of original righteousness, connected with a depraved inclination, 
 corrupting in the most inward parts the whole human nature, derived 
 from the fall of our first parents, and propagated to all men by nafural 
 generation, rendering them indisposed to spiritual good, but inclined to 
 evil, and making them the objects of divine wrath, and eternal condem- 
 nation." 
 
 Quen. (II, 52) : " Original sin is a want of original righteousness, 
 derived from the sin of Adam and propagated to all men who are be- 
 gotten in the ordinary mode of generation, including the dreadful cor- 
 ruption and depravity of human nature and all its powers, excluding all 
 from the grace of God and eternal life, and subjecting them to temporal 
 and eternal punishments, unless they be born again of water and the 
 Spirit, or obtain the remission of their sins through Christ." 
 
 The proofs of the existence of original sin are drawn from Gen. 6 : 
 5; 8: 21; Job 14: 4; Ps. 14: 2, 3 ; 58: 3; Isaiah 48: 8; John 3: 5, 
 6 ; Eph. 2: 3. Especially from Ps. 51 : 5 ; Rom. 5 : 12-14; Gen. 5 : 
 3. Chmn. Loc. Th., I, 230) thus comments on the important passage, 
 Rom. 5 : 12 : " (1) The efficient cause of original sin is shown to be 
 the first man. (2) The subject is pointed out, which adhered not only 
 
OPPOSING ARGUMENTS ANSWERED. 251 
 
 in Adam, but has passed into the world, i. e., into all men who come 
 into the world. (3) The punishment is described, which is not only the 
 death of the body, but the reign of death and the sentence of condem- 
 nation. . . . (4) Lest the guilt should be understood only as of the sin 
 of another, without any personal fault, Paul affirms that the whole 
 world is guilty, both in consequence of the one sin of the first man, and 
 because all have sinned, i. e., have been constituted sinners. (5) He 
 indicates what kind of sin it was, when he says that even they have 
 original sin who have not sinned after the similitude of Adam's trans- 
 gression. (6) He describes the manner how original sin is propagated 
 — he says, by one man." 
 
 [Grh., IV, 322: "The chief arguments* of the Pelagians are: 1. 
 Ez. 18 : 20, ' The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father.' Answer : 
 The passage treats not of original, but of actual sins, whose penalty the 
 son does not bear, if he desist from the sins of the guilty parent, and be 
 converted. We invert the argument. Infants are punished by disease 
 and death ; therefore, they have sin of their own, because of which they 
 are punished, viz., original sin propagated in them by their parents, 
 which is no longer foreign to them, but transmitted to them, by the 
 contagion of propagation. 2. Ps. 106 : 28, Infants are pronounced in- 
 nocent. Jon. 4: 11; Rom. 9: 11. Answer. This is to be understood 
 relatively with respect to actual sins, and not with respect to original sin. 
 3. Rom. 4: 15 : ' Where there is no law, there is no transgression.'' An- 
 swer: Infants are both without the law, i. e., they are ignorant of the 
 law, Rom. 2: 12, and yet are not without law, i. e., they are not free 
 from the accusation whereby the law reproves and condemns all lawless- 
 ness. 4. '•If there be original sin, sin must be attributed to God forming 
 infants in the womb ; therefore, marriage is to be condemned.' Answer : 
 The fault in a nature must be discriminated from the kindness of God in 
 forming the nature. Both nature and the fault or defect of the nature 
 are propagated ; of which, the former is good ; the latter, evil. 5. If 
 the sins of godly parents are forgiven in Baptism, how then do they prop- 
 agate sin to their children? Answer: Carnal generation is not according 
 to grace, but according to nature. Augustine: 'In begetting, he does 
 not give that whence one is regenerated, but whence one is generated. *" 
 ' That which is born of flesh is flesh.' Do you ask how an unrighteous 
 man is born of a righteous, when you see that one could not be right- 
 eous, unless he were regenerate ? A grain of wheat though freed from 
 chaff produces grains with chaff. Circumcised Israelites beget uncir- 
 cumcised children."] 
 
 [10] Quen. (II, 59) : "In form it is an habitual want of original 
 
252 THE STATE OF CORRUPTION. 
 
 righteousness, Ps. 14 : 3 ; 53 : 3 ; Rom. 3 : 10, 11, 12, 23, united with 
 a contrary form, i. e., the most complete corruption of the whole nature, 
 Rom. 7:17, 20, 21 ; Heb. 12 : 1." See Symbolical Books, and espe- 
 cially Ap. Conf., II, 26; Form. Cone, I, 11. 
 
 In reference to the former (viz., the want of original righteousness), 
 Br. (404) remarks: " Here belongs that death, or the want of spiritual 
 life, and of all the active powers which are required for the exercise of 
 vital acts in conformity with the divine law. And this death is ascribed 
 to men, because they are by nature children of wrath, Eph. 2 : 1,5; 
 Col. 2: 13. For, as original righteousness had inhered in the faculties 
 of the soul of the first man, and had, as it were, animated and prepared 
 them to live a life of godliness, and to elicit and exercise among them- 
 selves actions and motions spiritually good; so this primeval righteous- 
 ness having been lost, a man is like a dead body which has been de- 
 prived, by the separation of the soul from the body, of all power to call 
 forth in itself and to exercise vital acts and motions, because he is desti- 
 tute of strength for the performance of spiritual acts and motions." 
 
 In reference to the latter (viz., concupiscence), Br. (404) : "For the 
 same carnal man who, in consequence of the want of spiritual life, is 
 like one dead, in another respect is said to be living and very active, 
 but it is a life alien from the life of God, Eph. 4: 18; 2: 3. The fac- 
 ulties of the soul are, indeed, essentially vital faculties; and, when they 
 are deprived of original righteousness, although they lack the powers 
 necessary to conduct the life in a manner agreeable to God, neverthe- 
 less those powers are not lost or destroyed, as far as there is in them 
 vitality and strength to call forth vital acts and motions. Therefore, 
 they pursue another course of life, manifestly different from the former." 
 Concupiscence is, therefore, predicated along with the want of original 
 righteousness ; and the following position is taken as opposed to the 
 Papists. Quen. (II, 135): "Original sin, formally considered, con- 
 sists not in a mere want of rectitude which should exist, or a want of 
 concreated righteousness, but also in a state of illegality, or an ap- 
 proach, contrary to the divine law, to a forbidden object, which, in one 
 word, is called a depraved concupiscence." " Original sin is, therefore, 
 a depravity negative and positive: negative, without the good which 
 should exist; positive, desirous of the evil which should not exist, i. e., 
 concupiscence itself." The positive depravity is thus more particularly 
 defined. Quen. (II, 136) : " Original sin is called a positive depravity, 
 not accurately and according to philosophical abstraction, according to 
 which every positive entity is a good created by God, but according to 
 the latitude used by theologians, and that (1) denominatively, as far as 
 
ORIGINAL SIN INHERENT AND HEREDITARY. 253 
 
 it includes a subjective positive act ; (2) formally, as far as, besides the 
 act in which the privation is inherent, and besides the want of that 
 original righteousness which ought to exist, it involves also an inclina- 
 tion, and a wickedness directly opposite to original righteousness." 
 
 The particular parts of original sin are then more specifically thus de- 
 scribed by Be. (406-408): "In respect of the intellect, original sin im- 
 plies a total want of spiritual light, so that it cannot know God aright, 
 nor perfectly prescribe in what way he should be worshipped, nor em- 
 brace with a firm assent the things which have been divinely revealed; 
 at the same time, also, there is a proneness of the intellect to form rash 
 and false judgments concerning spiritual things; even also in those 
 things which lie open to the light of nature, there is a certain impotency 
 in the knowledge of God and the government of life. In respect of the 
 will, original sin consists in a want of original holiness, or of the ability 
 to love God above all things, and to perform what the intellect has dic- 
 tated aright, and also to restrain the appetite in a proper manner; also, 
 on the contrary, in that the will is inclined to sinful acts. In respect 
 of the sensuous appetite, there is a want of the obedience that is due to 
 the higher faculties, and a rushing, as if by some impulse, contrary to 
 them, into those things which are agreeable to the senses, although they 
 are prohibited by the divine law; the decision of reason either not hav- 
 ing been waited for, or having been rejected." 
 
 [11] Coxf. Aug. II. "They teach that, since the fall of Adam, all 
 men who are begotten in the natural way are born with sin (i. e.) with- 
 out the fear of God, or faith in God, and with concupiscence; and that 
 this disease, or original fault, is truly sin, condemning and causing now, 
 also, eternal death to those who are not born again by baptism and the 
 Holy Spirit." See Ap. Coxf. II, 38, 41. Form. Coxc, Sol. Decl 
 I, 6. "This evil Dr. Luther was accustomed sometimes to call the sin 
 of our nature or person ; by which he meant that, although a man 
 should not think, speak, or do any evil (which, indeed, since the fall of 
 our first parents, is impossible for human nature, in this life), neverthe- 
 less, the nature and person of man are sinful (i. e.) that they are wholly 
 and completely infected, poisoned, and corrupted before God, by orig- 
 inal sin, in their very inmost parts, and the most profound recesses of 
 the heart ; and in consequence of this corruption and fall of our first 
 parents, the nature and person of man are accused and condemned by 
 the law of God, so that we are by nature the children of wrath, the 
 slaves of death and damnation, unless we be liberated from these evils, 
 and be preserved through the benefits which flow from the merits of 
 Christ." 
 
254 THE STATE OF CORRUPTION. 
 
 Quen. (II, 60) : "This concupiscence, denoting the propensity to evil 
 which is implanted in the depraved nature, even as it remains in the 
 regenerate, is truly sin, because the definition of sin suits it, and there- 
 fore Paul, Rom. 7, calls it sin fourteen times, not by metonymy, that it 
 is only the punishment of the first sin, and the cause of subsequent 
 actual transgression, as the Papists teach, but properly and formally, 
 because it is truly sin, whence also the Apostle names it the law of sin 
 warring against the law of the mind, an evil, a sinning sin." 
 
 [12] Br. (420): " The consequences of original sin are various 
 evils : In respect of the soul, a want of freedom of the will in spiritual 
 things, and an infirmity of the will in things natural ; actual transgres- 
 sions, multiplied both in kind and number; a want of grace, and, on the 
 contrary, the anger of God. In respect of the body, diseases and other 
 troubles, with temporal death ; finally, also, eternal death or damna- 
 tion." [It having been urged that original sin in itself is not an ade- 
 quate cause of eternal death, Cal. (XII, 229, sqq.) answers: "That 
 not all infected with original sin are condemned, is due not to the fact 
 that original sin is not of itself an adequate or sufficient cause of con- 
 demnation, but that by faith some obtain forgiveness, as of actual, so 
 also of original sin." The passage John 3:18 being cited to show that 
 unbelief is the only damning sin, he answers: "Unbelief condemns 
 formally; but sins condemn materially. Unbelief is the cause of our 
 not being freed from the condemnation, from which by faith we can be 
 freed. * * Luther's marginal gloss on John 15 : 22 does not teach 
 the contrary. For he says that original sin has not been blotted out 
 except by Christ's acquiring for it expiation through his merit ; aye, he 
 adds that original sin even now condemns those who do not believe." 
 Cf. Geehard VIII, 26 sqq. Quenst. II, 62 : " Original sin is in 
 itself, and of its own nature, deserving of divine wrath and eternal death, 
 although in fact accidentally, viz., through and because of Christ's 
 merit, apprehended by faith, it does not condemn the regenerate. That 
 is: In itself, it is always a damnable sin, although in the regenerate, it 
 has lost, because of Christ's merit, the power to damn, Rom. 8: 1. 
 Here the Apostle does not say that there is nothing damnable in the 're- 
 generate, or those who are in Christ Jesus, but that there is no naT&Kpi/ia, 
 i. e., nothing which would actually bring damnation."] 
 
 [13] When it is asserted, concerning original sin, that it is inherent 
 naturally, two things are hereby intended : 
 
 (1) Quen. (II, 62): " That it is not a mere accident, lightly and ex- 
 ternally attached, but internally and intimately inhering, and therefore 
 called, Heb. 12: 1, the easily besetting sin (evn-epiaraTog) ; that it is an 
 
IS ORIGINAL SIN AN ACCIDENT? 255 
 
 accident connate (owepQvTor} and natural ; that it does not arise from the 
 nature as such, but it is produced together with it, oris connate with it; 
 that it is not any- temporary and transient accident, but is fixed and per- 
 manent." In order to keep aloof from such a view (the Pelagian), the 
 Dogmaticians express themselves in forcible language concerning hu- 
 man depravity. Thus Cblmn. (Loc. Th., I, 259): " There are not a 
 few who so extenuate original sin, that they pretend that it is a corrup- 
 tion of certain accidents only, and that the substance itself of man, and 
 especially of the soul, exists after the fall, and remains upright, unin- 
 jured, and pure : so that this quasi impediment having been removed, 
 the substance itself of man, after the fall, and before the renewing of the 
 Spirit, by, in, or of itself, has certain spiritual powers or faculties which 
 it employs of itself to begin to complete spiritual actions. . . . The true 
 and constant sentiment of the church must be opposed to, clearly ex- 
 plained and keenly defended against, these philosophical and Pelagian 
 vagaries, . . . viz., that the nature or substance in man, since the fall 
 and before regeneration, is by no means upright, pure, or sound; but 
 that the very nature or substance of man, and especially of the human 
 soul, is truly corrupt, vitiated, and depraved, and that not lightly or only 
 superficially, or even in some part only ; but that the whole mass (if I 
 may so speak) of the substance, or of human nature, and especially of 
 the soul, is corrupted and vitiated with the deepest and extreme deprav- 
 ity. . . . This corruption or depravity is nothing abstract, nor an idea 
 outside of the substance or nature of man, but is inherent in our very 
 nature or substance, and like a spiritual poison has infected, pervaded, 
 and diffused itself far and wide throughout all the members of our whole 
 substance or human nature." The position of Flacius, viz., "That orig- 
 inal sin is the very substance itself of man or the human soul," arose 
 from a misapprehension or an overstraining of these views. Therefore 
 the expression, " inherent in our nature," signifies — 
 
 (2) Quen. (II, 62): " That original sin is not the very substance of 
 man . . . but that which inheres in it after the manner of an accident, 
 for it is distinguished in the Scriptures, Rom. 7 : 20, from the essence 
 itself of man, and is called indwelling sin; now an inhabitant or guest is 
 not the same as the house, so neither is sin the same as man." 
 
 Form. Coxc. (Sol. Dec. 1 : 33): " Although original sin has infected 
 and corrupted the whole nature of man, like some spiritual poison and 
 horrible leprosy, so that now, in our corrupt nature, these two, viz., na- 
 ture alone and original sin alone, cannot be distinctly pointed out to 
 view ; yet the corrupt nature or the substance of corrupt man, body and 
 soul, or man himself created by God, in whom original sin dwells (by 
 
256 THE STATE OF CORRUPTION. 
 
 reason of which the nature, substance, and indeed the whole man is cor- 
 rupted), and original sin itself, which dwells in the nature or essence of 
 man, and corrupts it, are not one and the same. . . . The distinction, 
 therefore, between our nature, as it was created by God and is preserved 
 to this day, in which original sin dwells, and original sin, which dwells in 
 our nature, must be retained. " And this is the reason why original sin 
 is called accidental. Form. Conc. (Sol. Dec. I, 57): " Since, there- 
 fore, this is an unchangeable truth, that whatever is, is either a sub- 
 stance or an accident, namely, either something subsisting by itself, or 
 something elsewhere derived and adhering in a substance, . . .we 
 must assuredly admit . . . that sin is not a substance, but an acci- 
 dent." To this the Form, adds (I, 60): " When it is inquired what 
 kind of an accident original sin is, that is another question. No philos- 
 opher, no papist, no sophist, yea, no human reason, can exhibit a true 
 solution of this question ; its explication is to be sought from the Sacred 
 Scriptures alone." The expressions which have been employed by 
 Chmn. are sustained by the following distinction (Sol. Dec. I, 51): "In 
 order to avoid logomachies, terms of an equivocal signification should be 
 carefully and clearly explained. "When, e. g.. it is said : 'God creates 
 the nature of man,' by the term nature the very substance, body and 
 soul, is meant. But often a property or condition of anything (whether 
 it be taken in good part or bad) is called the nature of that thing ; as 
 when it is said, it is the nature of the serpent to strike and to infect with 
 poison (here not the substance,. but the badness of the serpent is ex- 
 pressed) ; in this sense Dr. Luther uses the term nature, when he says 
 that ' sin and to sin is the nature of corrupt man.' " 
 
 [14] Form. Conc. (Sol. Dec. I, 7) : " And at the present time, 
 even in this corruption of nature, God does not create sin in us, but, 
 together with the nature which God creates and effects in men, original 
 sin is propagated by natural generation, by seed corrupted by sin, from 
 father and mother." 
 
 Here the question naturally presents itself, in what manner this cor- 
 rupt nature perpetuates itself, and ''Whether the soul is propagated 
 by traduction (ex traduce) ? i. e., as in natural generation the flesh 
 of the offspring is substantially transmitted from the seed of the 
 parent, whether also the soul of the child, in like manner, is transmitted 
 from the soul of the parent?" On this subject Chmn. (Loc. Th. I, 
 236) says : " Luther, in his discussions, concludes that he wishes to 
 affirm nothing publicly concerning that question, but that he privately 
 held the opinion of traduction. It is sufficient for us to know concern- 
 ing the efficient cause, that our first parents by their fall merited that, 
 
TERMINATION OF ORIGINAL SIN. .257 
 
 such as they were after the fall, both in body and mind, such also all 
 their posterity should be procreated. But how the soul contracts that 
 sin we can safely remain in ignorance of, since the Holy Spirit has not 
 been pleased to disclose this in certain and clear Scripture testimonies." 
 
 Hutt. also (328) says: "In consequence of this disagreement among 
 the Dogmaticians it has come to pass, even in our day, that there are 
 not wanting theologians even of the highest rank who, in regard to this 
 very question, would rather keep silent altogether (eirexetv) than to assert 
 anything positively either within or beyond the express authority of 
 Scripture." But he adds, also : " If any of our brethren should ask 
 which opinion we think most accordant with truth, we fearlessly answer 
 that Ave precisely accord with the opinion of Luther, and hold it to be 
 consonant with Scripture, namely, that the human soul is propagated by 
 traduction ; so that, just as everything else produces its like, a lion be- 
 getting a lion, a horse begetting a horse, so also man begets man, and 
 not alone the flesh, or the body, but also the soul is propagated essen- 
 tially from its parents. (339) . . . And so our opinion is generally 
 held among all godly people, viz., that the soul has its origin in traduc- 
 tion." Quex. (II, 62) : " As the soul was the first to exhibit sin 
 {iTpurov detKTiKbv), so original sin itself, through the medium of the soul, 
 in which it most deeply inheres, is propagated per traducem." (For a 
 fuller discussion of this subject see § 20, Note 8.) 
 
 [15] It is more specifically described as follows. Quex. (II, 62) : 
 " In original sin there are four things worthy of attention, to each of 
 which a certain limit of duration has been prefixed. (1) An inflam- 
 mable material {fames, tinder) habitually inhering, or a root. (2) The 
 sense of this tendency or root. (3) The dominion of it; and finally 
 (4) Guilt. The last is removed in regeneration and justification ; do- 
 minion in sanctification (not at once, but gradually and successively, 
 because sanctification is not complete in this life) ; the sense of it is re- 
 moved in death ; the material itself, not in the incineration (since not 
 the body, but the soul, is the first and immediate subject of sin), but in 
 the dissolution of the soul and body." 
 
 Ap. Conf. (II, 35): " Luther always wrote that Baptism removes 
 the guilt of original sin, although the material of sin. as they call it, viz., 
 concupiscence, remains. He added, also, concerning its material char- 
 acter, that the Holy Spirit, being given in baptism, begins to mortify 
 the propensity to sin, and creates new motions in man. Augustine also 
 speaks in the same manner, and says that sin is remitted in baptism, not 
 that it may not exist, but that it may not be imputed. He openly con- 
 fesses that it exists, that is, that sin remains, although it is not im 
 puted." 
 
258 OF ACTUAL SINS. 
 
 [On the other hand, the Council of Trent maintained that concupi- 
 scence in the regenerate is not properly sin. Chemnitz answers (Ex. 
 Cone. Trid., Pr. Ed., 108) : " It is not a good thing, as Paul shows in 
 Pom. 7, in many words. Nor is it an adiaphoron or indifferent mat- 
 ter, Rom. 7 : 21. It is certain, therefore, that it is an evil. . . . This 
 original coucupiscence is forgiven, weakened and diminished in baptism ; 
 yet not so as to be suddenly removed and altogether extinguished, as no 
 longer to exist ; for as long as the regenerate live here there must be a 
 law of sin in their members. But the remaining concupiscence does 
 not hinder them from pleasing God, and being heirs of everlasting life. 
 Nevertheless this is not because this concupiscence in the regenerate has 
 been rendered holy or indifferent by means of baptism. But it is of 
 God's grace, that such an evil dwelling in the flesh of the regenerate is, 
 for Christ's sake, not imputed to them for condemnation."] 
 
 § 27. Of Actual Sins. 
 
 Original sin is the ground and source of all actual transgres- 
 sions. By these we are to understand, however, not only sins 
 which manifest themselves in outward acts, but also those which 
 depend upon purely internal acts of man. Hutt. (Loc. c. Th., 
 346): "Actual transgression is every act, whether external 
 or internal, which conflicts with the law of God." [1] They are 
 numerous and diversified, and are divided, according to Quen". 
 (II, 65), in the following manner: 
 
 I. "In respect of an internal defective cause in the agents, into 
 voluntary and involuntary. A voluntary sin is an act by which 
 man transgresses the divine law, by a deliberate volition, con- 
 trary to the dictates of conscience. Involuntary sin is an act 
 inconsistent with, the law, committed without sure knowledge or 
 a deliberate purpose of the will." Involuntary sin is accordingly 
 divided into sins of ignorance and of infirmity." [2] 
 
 II. u In respect of the person sinning, 1, into our own sins and 
 the sins of others. Our own sins are those which we ourselves 
 contract, either by doing what has been prohibited, or by omit- 
 ting to do what has been commanded. Those are called the sins 
 of others, which are indeed perpetrated by others, but we share 
 or participate in them; [3] 2, into venial and mortal. Venial 
 sins are those which, as soon as they are committed, and at the 
 very moment when they are perpetrated, have pardon connected 
 
ACTUAL SINS CLASSIFIED. 259 
 
 with them by an indissoluble bond. Mortal sins are those which 
 produce spiritual death at the very moment when they are com- 
 mitted." [4] 
 
 III. " In respect of the material {in qua) in which they are 
 committed, they are divided into internal and external. Internal 
 are those of the heart ; external are those of word and deed." [5] 
 
 IV. "In respect of the material about which {circa quam) they 
 are committed; into sins against the first table immediately and 
 directly, and against the second table, i. e., against God, against 
 a neighbor, and against the person of the transgressor himself." 
 
 Y. " In respect of the sinful act itself: into sins of commission 
 and of omission. Sins of commission are those which consist in 
 positive acts whi«h come into conflict with a negative precept. 
 Sins of omission consist in the refusal or omission of acts which 
 are prescribed by a positive precept." (Br. 440.) [6] 
 
 VI. "In respect of the effect: into sins which cry out for pun- 
 ishment, and those which do not. Of the former hind are vicious 
 acts which provoke God to vengeance, although men are silent 
 or only connive at them. The latter are those which God endures 
 through his long-suffering, and either postpones the punishment, 
 or, if they have been committed by the regenerate, he forgives." 
 
 VII. "In resptect of their adjuncts, sins are divided into, 1, 
 more or less grievous (on account of the greater or less fault or 
 wickedness connected with them) ; [8] 2, into secret and mani- 
 fest ;[9] 3, into dead and living. Dead sins are those which 
 indeed remain in us, but are not known as sins, or certainly not 
 considered as great as they really are. Living sins are those 
 which are known to be such, and rage even after the knowledge 
 of the law, Rom. 7 : 8, 9 ; 4, into remaining and remitted sins. 
 A remaining sin is that which yet oppresses the sinner by its 
 guilt and weight. A remitted sin is that whose guilt has been 
 removed from the sinner, by the grace of God, for the sake of 
 the merit of Christ ; 5, into sins connected with hardness of heart 
 and blindness of mind, and those unconnected with them ; [10] 6, 
 into pardonable and unpardonable si7is. Of the latter class there 
 is only the sin against the Holy Ghost. [11] This sin consists in 
 a malicious denial of, a hostile attack upon, and a horrid bias- 
 
260 THE STATE OF CORRUPTION. 
 
 phemy of divine truth, evidently known and approved by eon- 
 science, and an obstinate and final] y persevering rejection of all 
 the means of salvation. Holl. (556) Matt. 12 : 31, 32 ; Mark. 
 3 : 28, 29 ; Luke 12 :. 10 ; Heb. 6 : 4-6 ; 10 : 26, 29." 
 
 [1] Cal. (V, 311) : "Actual sin is a departure from the law, by 
 which human thoughts and actions proceeding from the flesh, trans- 
 gress the divine law given by Moses, and thus it exposes the transgressor 
 to temporal and eternal punishment.' , 
 
 Holl. (537) : " Actual sin is a turning away, by a human act either 
 of commission or omission, from the rule of the divine law, incurring re- 
 sponsibility for guilt and liability to punishment." 
 
 Quen. (II. 63): " The word act and actual, in this place, is used not 
 strictly for external acts only, and sins of commission, but with such 
 latitude that it embraces also internal vicious emotions, both primary 
 and secondary, and also sins of omission. " 
 
 " In the Sacred Scriptures, actual sins are called works of the flesh, 
 Gal. 5:19; unfruitful ivorhs of darkness, Eph. 5 : 11 ; deeds of the old 
 man, Col. 3:9; dead works, Heb. 6 : 1 ; 9 : 14; unlawful deeds, 2 Peter 
 2 : 8, epya avo^a." 
 
 [2] Here these further remarks are to be added : (a) Quen. (II, 
 67): " Sin is here called voluntary, not because it is with the will or in 
 the will, for thus also involuntary violations of duty would be voluntary, 
 but it is understood here as opposed to that which is done through igno- 
 rance and inconsiderately (airpocupiTtxr)" (b) Holl. (542): "Volun- 
 tary sin is viewed both in respect of conscience, and in respect of the pur- 
 pose of the will." Sin against conscience is fourfold. For it is 
 committed either against a correct conscience, when a man, either by 
 action or omission, does not follow, but despises the dictate of conscience 
 when it agrees with the divine law ; or against an erroneous conscience, 
 when a man, either by action or omission, turns away from the dictate 
 of conscience imbued in error ; or against a probable conscience, when 
 any one is delinquent contrary to the dictate of the intellect, which 
 urges, for probable reasons, that something should be done or omitted 
 now and at this place ; or against a doubtful conscience when any one 
 does or omits that, concerning which he is in doubt whether it should be 
 done or omitted. Voluntary sin, viewed in respect of the purpose of the 
 will, is twofold. The one kind is that which is committed from mere 
 malice and a will altogether free. The other is that which is committed 
 under the power of a will influenced by force or fear, and by surround- 
 ing dangers. Matt. 26: 70, 72, 74; Mark 14: 68, 70, 71; Luke 22: 
 
ACTUAL SINS CLASSIFIED. 261 
 
 57, 58, 60; John 18: 25, 27." (c) Involuntary sins are (Quen. II, 
 70): "1. Sins of ignorance, which overtake the unwilling regenerate, in 
 consequence of the darkness of the mind, which has not been yet en- 
 tirely removed by the illumination of the Holy Spirit. 2. Sins of in- 
 firmity, which overtake the regenerate without any certain purpose of 
 sinning ; such are sinful emotions of the mind, which have suddenly 
 arisen without their will, and whatever unlawful words or deeds are the 
 result of inadvertence or precipitancy, and contrary to the purpose of 
 the will, Gen. 9: 21 ; 16 : 5 ; 18 : '12 ; Numbers 20: 11, 12; Acts*l5: 
 39 ; Rom. 7 : 15 ; Gal. 2 : 12, 13, 14 ; 6 : 1." 
 
 [3] Holl. (552) : " Our own sin is a vicious act, produced by a real 
 influence of our own : the sin of another imputed to us, is an unlawful 
 act, to the production of which we concur indeed by no real influence, 
 yet by an efficacious intention, so that it can be justly imputed to us. 
 (He concurs, by efficacious intention, in the sin of another, w r ho com- 
 mands, consults, consents, connives at, does not oppose, or give informa- 
 tion, and thus is the moral cause of the sin of another), Eph. 5 : 7 and 
 11 ; 1 Tim. 5 : 22 ; 2 John 11 ; Rev. 18 : 4." 
 
 [4] Holl. (547): (a) " Venial sin is every involuntary sin in the re- 
 generate, which neither removes the indwelling grace of the Holy 
 Spirit, nor extinguishes faith, but in the moment in which it is com- 
 mitted, has pardon connected with it by an indissoluble bond. The dis- 
 tinction of sin into mortal and venial, does not arise from the desert of 
 sin, for every sin, of itself, and by its own nature, in a court of law is 
 damnable; but (1) from the different conditions of the subject, or the 
 person sinning. For a venial sin exists in the regenerate, a mortal sin 
 in those who either never were regenerated, or, having been overcome 
 by the predominating power of the flesh, fell from a state of grace. 
 (2) From the estimate which God has made in the Gospel ; because 
 God, a reconciled and gracious Father, does not impute to the regener- 
 ate sins of infirmity and ignorance for guilt and punishment. (3) From 
 the event. A mortal sin precipitates the sinner into a state of wrath, 
 death, and condemnation, so that, if he should die in this state, and 
 without repentance, he would be certainly condemned; but a venial sin, 
 because it has pardon as an inseparable attendant, can consist with the 
 grace of God and saving faith." (Id. 551): "The causes of forgiveness 
 or non-imputation are, the compassion of God, the satisfaction and in- 
 tercession of Christ (1 John 2 : 1, 2; Rom. 8: 1), the efficacious opera- 
 tion of the Holy Spirit, and the daily penitence of the regenerate." 
 (Id. 547): (b) "A mortal sin is that by which the regenerate, having 
 been overcome by the flesh, and thus, not remaining in a regenerate 
 
262 THE STATE OF CORRUPTION. 
 
 state, transgress the divine law by a deliberate purpose of the will, con- 
 trary to the dictates of conscience, and thereby lose saving faith, reject 
 the gracious influences of the Holy Spirit, and cast themselves into a 
 state of wrath, death, and condemnation, " 
 
 [5] Holl. (552): "Sins of the heart are depraved thoughts and de- 
 sires which are cherished within the human breast ; sins of the lips are 
 wicked words and gestures expressed by the lips; sins of deed are actions 
 which are performed contrary to the divine law, by an external effort of 
 the members. Matt. 5:21, 22." 
 
 [6] Holl. (552) : "Sins of commission are positive acts, by which 
 the negative precepts of God are violated. Sins of omission are the 
 neglect of acts prescribed by the affirmative precepts of God, James 
 4: 16, 17. Note. Although there is oftentimes, in a sin of omission, a 
 certain illicit positive act, either an internal act of the will, as, for ex- 
 ample, to will to omit what had been commanded, or an external act, as 
 an operation by which any one is hindered from that which he ought to 
 do ; yet such a positive act is not always or necessarily required, but the 
 mere fact that one does not do what is commanded is sin." 
 
 [7] Holl. (553) : " Outcrying sins are the following, the Scriptures 
 being witness : 1. The fratricide committed by Cain, Gen. 4 : 10. 2. 
 The sins of the Sodomites, Gen. 18: 20. 3. The oppression of the Is- 
 raelites in Egypt, Exod. 3:9; of widows and orphans, Exod. 22 : 22. 
 4. The denial of wages due to hirelings, James 5 : 4." 
 
 [8] Holl. (454): " One sin is more grievous than another: I. In 
 respect to the efficient cause or person sinning. A Christian sins more 
 grievously than a heathen, though he commit the same crime. 2. In 
 respect of the impelling cause. He who commits adultery with his 
 neighbor's wife, for the sake of gratifying his lust, sins more grievously 
 than he who steals when impelled by hunger. 3. In respect of the ob- 
 ject. He is more guilty who slays his father than he who slays an 
 enemy. 4. In respect of the law. He sins more grievously who vio- 
 lates the first table of the law, than he who violates the second. 5. In 
 respect of the effect. That sin is regarded as the more grievous which 
 is attended with the greater injury." 
 
 [9] Holl. (554) : " A secret sin is that which is either unknown to 
 the person himself who sins, or which is known only to him who sins, 
 and a few others who wish it suppressed. An open sin is that which has 
 become known to many, and, if it be connected with offence to others, 
 is called a scandal. A scandal is an open sin which furnishes an occa- 
 sion of sinning to those w T ho know it. It is usually divided into given 
 or active scandal, and received or passive. The former is an open sin 
 
SIIT AGAINST THE HOLY GHOST. 263 
 
 which is the occasion of sinning to others ; the latter is a word or deed 
 of another, not in itself evil, by which others are offended, or take occa- 
 sion to sin." 
 
 [10] Holl. (555) : " Sin, connected with hardness of heart, is the 
 most atrocious of all, by which the mind of man, having been polluted, 
 remains averse to the word of God and blind, the will, confirmed in 
 wickedness, resists the Holy Spirit, the appetite indulges in beastly 
 pleasures, and therefore the sinner, being with difficulty or not at all 
 corrigible, brings upon himself temporal and eternal punishments. The 
 cause of this hardness is not God, but partly the devil, who multiplies 
 evils, blinds the mind, and fills the heart with wickedness, 2 Cor. 4: 4; 
 Acts 5:3; Eph. 2:2; partly man, who rejects the ordinary means of 
 salvation, and is continually selling himself to the desire and practice 
 of sin, Matt. 13: 15." In reference to Exod. 7 : 3, Holl. (492) re- 
 marks : " God does not hafden men causally or effectively, by sending 
 hardness into their hearts, but judicially, permissively , and by forsaking 
 them. For the act of hardening is a judicial act, by which, on account 
 of antecedent, voluntary, and inevitable wickedness, God justly permits 
 a man habitually wicked to rush into greater crimes, and withdraws his 
 grace from him, and finally delivers him up to the power of Satan, by 
 whom he is afterwards driven on into greater sins, until he finally cuts 
 him off from the right of the heavenly inheritance." 
 
 [11] Quen. (II, 74) : "The word Spirit is not usejl here with re- 
 spect to essence, as the term is common to the three persons of the God- 
 head, but it is used personally, for the third person of the Godhead ; 
 yet respect being had, not so much to the person itself of the Holy 
 Spirit, as if this sin were committed immediately against him, as to his 
 office and blessings, for example, as far as he strives to illuminate men 
 through the doctrines of the Gospel. . . . Therefore, the Holy Spirit 
 must here be viewed in relation to his office, and the sin is said to be 
 against the Holy Spirit, partly in respect of his ministry, and partly in 
 respect of his testimony. Rom. 8: 16." 
 
 Grh. (V, 85) : " The sin against the Holy Ghost, therefore, is an 
 intentional denial of evangelical truth, which was acknowledged and 
 approved by conscience, connected with a bold attack upon it, and vol- 
 untary blasphemy of it. For we must observe that this kind of sin was 
 proved against the Pharisees by Christ; for, although they were con- 
 strained by the force of the truth uttered by him, and were convicted in 
 their consciences by its illumination, yet they raged against him by their 
 wicked impiety, to such a degree that they blushed not to ascribe his 
 doctrines and miracles to Satan. The epistle to the Hebrews thus de- 
 
264 THE STATE OF CORRUPTION. 
 
 scribes those who sin against the Holy Ghost, that they, having been 
 previously illuminated, have also tasted the heavenly gift, and have been 
 made partakers of the Holy Ghost, have also tasted the good word of 
 God, and the powers of the world to come, yet afterwards fall away, 
 and thus crucify to themselves afresh the Son of God, and put him to an 
 open shame. Also that, by voluntary apostasy, they trample under foot 
 the Son of God, and esteem his blood, by which they were sanctified, 
 an unholy thing, and do despite unto the spirit of grace." 
 
 Quen. (II, 82) : " The form of the sin against the Holy Ghost con- 
 sists, (1) In a denial of evangelical truth, which was evidently and 
 sufficiently acknowledged and approved, and which denial was effected 
 by a full, free, and unimpeded exercise of the will. Heb. 6: 4; 10: 
 26, 29. (2) In a hostile attack upon the same. Matt. 12: 31, 32. 
 (3) In voluntary and atrocious blasphemy. Heb. 10: 26, 29." To 
 this the remark is added, however (lb., p.»83) : "That these essential 
 requisites of this sin must always be taken conjointly, and never sepa- 
 rately, and that then that must be called the sin against the Holy Ghost, 
 concerning which all these can be conjointly verified." The following 
 additional description flows from the nature of the subject: "Not in- 
 fants, but adults, commit this sin, who are not destitute of the knowledge 
 of the revealed Word of God, but who have been illuminated and con- 
 victed by conscience of the certainty of divine truth, and have fallen 
 from the desire and love of it into bitter hatred against it." (Holl., 
 561.) To which Br. adds (444) : "Whether the doctrine was once 
 approved by the assent of divine faith and a public profession, or only 
 was so clearly perceived that the mind, having been convicted, had 
 nothing which it could oppose to it. In the former mode, those apos- 
 tates sin against the Holy Ghost who deny the truth once acknowledged 
 and believed, and utter reproaches against it, as Paul describes them, 
 Heb. 6 : 4. The Pharisees and Scribes belong to the latter class, who 
 never, by their confession, approved of the doctrines of Christ. In the 
 meantime, they were so convinced of their truth, from the Scriptures 
 and the miracles of Christ, that they could oppose nothing but re- 
 proaches." As adjuncts of this sin, Quen. (II, 83) adds: " (1) Final 
 impenitence, Heb. 6: 4-6; (2) Absolute irremissibleness, Matt. 12: 
 31 ; Mark 3 : 28, 29; Luke 12 : 10; (3) Exclusion from prayer, 1 John 
 5: 16." 
 
 Holl. (564): "It is irremissible, not through any want of divine 
 grace, or inadequacy of the atonement of Christ, or any want of the 
 efficacious influence of the Holy Ghost, but on account of a wicked re- 
 jection of all the means of grace, and by reason of final impenitence." 
 
EXTENT OF THE FREEDOM OF THE WILL. 265 
 
 On the other hand, the sin against the Son of man is remissible. Matt. 
 12: 32; Luke 12: 10. Quen. (II, 87); "The sin against the Son of 
 man is either a denial of the truth of the Gospel already acknowledged 
 concerning the Son of God, who became man, resulting from infirmity 
 of the flesh and fear of danger, but not united with a hostile attack and 
 blasphemy, or an attack or blasphemy through ignorance of the truth 
 not acknowledged." 
 
 § 28. The Freedom of the Will. 
 Since so great a change has taken place in man through the 
 fall, the question remains to be discussed, What powers to act 
 does man still retain? [1] for, since all these powers are depend- 
 ent upon knowledge and will, it is natural that, so far as knowl- 
 edge and will are weakened or lost, these powers also to act 
 should thereby suffer. But the question, as to the powers re- 
 tained by man, is identical with that as to how far freedom of the 
 will {liberum arbitrium) in regard to his actions pertains to him. 
 [2] As, however, various opinions have often been entertained 
 in reference to this liberum arbitrium, it is necessary, first of all, 
 that we definitely determine the proper significance of this term. 
 If we understand by it the will itself, then it cannot be questioned 
 that since the fall this still belongs to man, for without this he 
 would cease to be man. [3] In like manner it belongs also to 
 the nature of man that neither in his will nor in his acts, neither 
 externally nor internally (by instinct) can he be determined by 
 irresistible necessity. [4] All this is 'therefore to be predicated 
 of man after the fall, no less than 'before it, for all this belongs 
 strictly to the essential nature of man, which suffered no change 
 through the fall. But, if we understand by liberum arbitrium 
 that power of willing, in virtue of which man can act in every- 
 thing, in good as well as in evil, entirely without hindrance, just 
 as he pleases ("the liberum arbitrium is that power of the will 
 which, following the judgment of reason, enables man most freely 
 to embrace the good and resist the evil" (Hutt., Log. c. Th., 
 269) ), [5] then it follows, from the change that has occurred in 
 man through the fall, that this cannot now be predicated of him. 
 If this change consists in the loss of the divine image, it at once 
 follows that man can no longer freely choose between good and 
 evil, but has lost the power to will and to do that which is good. 
 18 
 
266 THE STATE OF CORRUPTION. 
 
 [6] If, then, in describing more particularly the liberum arbitri- 
 um, as it exists in fallen man, we must say, man, in consequence 
 of the evil disposition that dwells within him since the fall, is no 
 longer able to will or to do anything really good and acceptable 
 to God, viz., nothing of all that the Holy Scriptures designate 
 and prescribe as such, because all of this can be accomplished 
 only under the special influence of the Spirit of God. He is 
 therefore so completely destitute of the liberum arbitrium in rebus 
 spiritualibus, [7] that he cannot of his own accord, even cherish 
 a desire for salvation and a change of his present depraved con- 
 dition. [8] And in this condition all that remains to him is 
 liberum arbitrium in malis (liberty of choice in regard to what 
 is evil), [9] and liberum arbitrium in rebus externis, [10] namely, 
 in all those things which, being recognizable by the light of rea- 
 son, are within the reach of the natural powers, without needing 
 the aid of a truly good disposition. [11] 
 
 [1] Grh. (V, 87): " Connection with the preceding. We have seen 
 above in what wonderful and miserable ways original sin, like poison, 
 has pervaded all the powers of man, how intimately the corruption 
 arising from it has adhered to human nature, what pestilential fruits 
 that envenomed seed has produced. It remains for us to inquire, what 
 there is yet of strength in man?" 
 
 Chmn. (Loc. c. Th., 179) : " This is the question, What human 
 powers are there after the fall to produce obedience to the law, when 
 darkness is in the mind, aversion to God in the will, and in the heart 
 rebellion against the law of God? And, because not only external civil 
 acts are demanded by the law of God, but a perfect and perpetual obe- 
 dience of the whole human nature, what, and how much can the will of 
 man accomplish ? Therefore the caption of this section would have 
 been clearer, concerning man's powers, than concerning the freedom of 
 the will." 
 
 [2] Quen. (II, 170) : " These powers remaining in man after the 
 fall are otherwise called the freedom of the will." 
 
 Grh. (V, 87), thus explains the term liberum arbitrium, or freedom 
 of the will : " These powers of man are best judged of from the rational 
 soul by which he is distinguished from the brutes, and is constituted a 
 distinct species. Two faculties belong to the rational soul, viz., mind 
 and will; the former performs its office by knowing, discriminating, re- 
 flecting, judging; the latter by choosing and rejecting. From the con- 
 
HUMAN ABILITY. 267 
 
 currence of both, avvSpofiy, that is produced which is commonly called, 
 the free determination, which is a faculty of the mind and will, so that 
 the determination belongs to the mind and the free belongs to the will." 
 Therefore, Holl. (573) : " The proper and adequate seat of free deter- 
 mination is the will. But the intellect concurs antecedently, and by 
 way of preparation (TrapaaKevaoriKug), in the execution of the free deter- 
 mination." 
 
 Quen. (II, 170): "The term free determination is not given in so 
 many words (diapp^Srjv) in the Scriptures; yet is found for substance, 
 and in equivalent terms, in Deut. 30: 19; Josh. 24: 15 ; 1 Cor. 7 : 37; 
 Phil. 5: 14; Heb. 10: 26; 1 Pet. 5: 2." 
 
 [o] Chmn. (Loc. c. Th., 182): "There is great diversity among ec- 
 clesiastical writers, some affirming, others denying the freedom of the 
 will. Even the same writer, in different places, seems oftentimes to 
 express opposite sentiments on this subject, sometimes affirming and 
 sometimes denying it. This diversity cannot be more readily settled 
 than by a grammatical explanation of the word. For, if the term free 
 will be used in the most common acceptation, it signifies nothing more 
 than, (1) that the man who possesses it is rational, or has mind and 
 choice ; (2) that besides natural emotions and actions, concerning which 
 there is no deliberation of mind or choice of will, a man has voluntary 
 emotions, to the exercise of which the judgment of the mind and the 
 inclination of the will concur ; (3) and that in virtues and vices, in or- 
 der that actions may be called either good or bad, an intelligent. mind is 
 required and a will which either yields to or resists the judgment." 
 
 Hutt. (Loc. c. Th., 267); "Sometimes the term will or choice is 
 employed to designate the other faculty of the soul, indeed the very 
 substance of the will itself, whose function is simply that of willing 
 (to velle). Thus regarded, scarcely any one will deny free will to 
 man, unless he dare assert that man is totally destitute of this faculty of 
 the soul. The absurdity of this is, indeed, deservedly ridiculed by all, 
 inasmuch as no faculty or power of the soul can be ignored, without ig- 
 noring the whole substance of the soul itself; then this is, itself, nothing 
 else than what its faculties are, and when one faculty perishes it must 
 itself expire." Grh. (V, 100) : " The question is not concerning the 
 essence of the will itself, whether this has survived the fall, for this we 
 emphatically maintain, viz., that man has lost not his will, but the 
 soundness of it." 
 
 [4] Grh. (V, 87): " Liberty is assigned to choice in the first place, 
 in respect of its mode of action, because it is such that the will as far as 
 it is such, acts freely, t. e., it is not forced or violently hurried along by 
 
268 THE STATE OF COKKUPTION. 
 
 an external motion, nor does it act alone by natural instinct, but either 
 embraces, or rejects something of its own accord, or from an inner prin- 
 ciple of movement. In this sense, free and voluntary are synonymous ; 
 and to say that the will is not free, is the same as if any one would say, 
 that that which is warm is without warmth. That is called freedom from 
 compulsion, according to which it happens that the will cannot be forced 
 to do anything contrary to its inclination. Also freedom from necessity , 
 as far as necessity is employed in the sense of force and violence. Others 
 call it interior liberty, by which the will of man is moved voluntarily, 
 freely, without coercion, by a power implanted (and rrpoaipiaet, with ca- 
 pacity to choose), and has within itself the principle of its own motion. 
 By others it is called liberty in the subject. This liberty, since it is a 
 natural and essential property, given to the will by God, has not been 
 lost by the fall. The substance of man has not perished ; therefore, 
 neither has the rational soul ; therefore neither the will, therefore neither 
 the essential liberty of the will. The will is an essential power ^pf the 
 soul, and the soul is nothing else than the powers or essential faculties 
 themselves. Therefore while the soul remains, its essential powers, 
 intellect and will, also remain. On the other hand, the power of free 
 and uncoerced volition is essential to the will ; therefore as long as the 
 will remains, this power also remains. In this sense and respect we 
 firmly believe, and emphatically declare, that the will of man has re- 
 mained free even after the fall." 
 
 Quen. (II, 171) makes a distinction between freedom from violence 
 and constraint, and freedom from inward necessity, and remarks : "Free- 
 dom from violence is common to man with the brutes ; but man has 
 freedom from necessity in common with God and angels." The following 
 distinction also deserves a place here : u An intelligent nature, that is 
 at the same time infinite and divine, possesses freedom of the will in 
 the most excellent and perfect manner ; finite or angelical and human 
 nature in a more imperfect manner." 
 
 [5] Hutt. (Loc. c, 268): "Sometimes the term will or choice is 
 understood to signify the capacity of determining freely to choose that 
 which is good and freely to avoid that which is evil." 
 
 Grh. (V, 98): " Free will in man before the fall was that faculty of 
 the reason and will by virtue of which he was able to sin and not to 
 sin." 
 
 Quen. (II, 175): " The form of free choice consists in the indifference 
 of the will, both that which has respect to specification as well as that 
 which has respect to the exercise of the act; that is, it consists in such 
 indifference and freedom that the will is not necessarily determined to 
 
NO FREE WILL IN SPIRITUALITIES. 269 
 
 one thing, but all the requisites to action being placed before it in accord- 
 ance with its own liberty, it can do either this or that, can choose one 
 and reject the other, which is freedom of specification (or specific free- 
 dom) ; can either act or not act, which is freedom of action (or active 
 freedom). This liberty is also called ' liberty of action from the necessity 
 of immutability ,' which is exercised when one acts without being con- 
 trolled by violence or coercion, at the prompting of an internal impulse 
 that holds itself immovably to its purpose." 
 
 [6] Grh. (V, 98): " If the question be concerning the liberty of 
 rectitude, or the ^vvafitg (power), in equilibrium, of deciding either way, 
 of choosing or rejecting either good or evil, we maintain that this has 
 perished. For, after through sin the image of God was lost, at the same 
 time also the dvva/ug, or power, to choose the good was lost (for it was 
 part of the divine image), and because through sin man was not only de- 
 spoiled but also miserably corrupted : therefore, in the place of that lib- 
 erty, there succeeded the unbridled impulse to evil, so that since the 
 fall, in men corrupt and not yet regenerate (either corrupt by their own 
 will, as our first parents, or born from corrupt parents, as all their pos- 
 terity), the will is free only towards that which is evil, since such cor- 
 rupt and not yet regenerate men are able to do nothing but sin." 
 
 (Id., V, 100): " Understanding the term liberty as describing the 
 free power and faculty of choosing the good and rejecting the evil, that 
 was possessed by Adam, we maintain that Luther was perfectly correct 
 in saying, ' Free will is a title without the thing itself, or a thing with 
 nothing but a title.' " 
 
 [7] Quen. (II, 177): "By spiritual things are understood such 
 emotions and actions as are prescribed by the law and the gospel, and 
 can be produced only by the motion and action of the Spirit of God, so 
 that they are the true knowledge of God, according to the measure of 
 written revelation, detestation of sin committed, or sorrow for sins, the 
 fear of God, faith in Christ, the new obedience, the love of God and of 
 our neighbor." 
 
 Chmn. (Loc. c. Th., 190): "Thejiuman will cannot, by its own 
 powers, without the Holy Spirit, either begin interior and spiritual 
 movements, or produce interior obedience of the heart, or persevere 
 unto the end in the course commenced and perfect it. They are called 
 spiritual acts because (Rom. 7 : 14) 'the law is spiritual,' that is, it is 
 not satisfied by any external civil actions which the unregenerate can 
 perform; but it demands such movements and actions as (1) cannot be 
 performed except by the agency of the Holy Spirit; (2) which unre- 
 newed nature not only cannot perform, but even hinders the Holy Spirit 
 in performing." 
 
270 THE STATE OF CORRUPTIOX. 
 
 The Form. Conc. thus defines (Sol. Dec. II, 20) : " Spiritual or 
 divine things are those which have respect to the salvation of the soul.' , 
 Concerning these says Quen. (II, 178) : " We assert that the powers 
 of the unrenewed man, both in intellect and will, whether for the be- 
 ginning, or continuing, or completing these entirely spiritual acts which 
 have just now been mentioned, are not only bound, impeded, or even 
 weakened or broken, but altogether destroyed, lost, extinct and a nullity. 
 For, in knowing and seeking an object spiritually good, the old powers 
 in man are not renewed, the drowsy are not awakened, the infirm 
 strengthened, nor the bound loosed, but altogether other and new 
 powers and faculties are bestowed and put on." 
 
 The proof of this position, as to the intellect, Quen. (II, 178) de- 
 rives from Eph. 5 : 8 ; 1 Cor. 2 : 14 ; 2 Cor. 3:5; Rom. 1 : 21, 22 ; 
 as to the will, from Gen. 6:5; Rom. 8:7; Ezek. 11 : 19 ; 36 : 26 ; 
 Rom. 2 : 5 ; 6 : 17, 20 ; John 8 : 34 ; Eph. 2 : 1,2; Col. 2 : 13 ; Ps. 
 14: 2, 3 ; Matt. 7 : 18. This want of freedom is carried so far that 
 Quen. (II, 178) proceeds : " To this category also do we refer the go- 
 ing to church for the sake of receiving information from the preached 
 Word, the reading and hearing of the Word of God with the desire of 
 profit, the being controlled by the desire of information from the Word, 
 all which are the operations of antecedent and receptive grace. Here 
 belongs also the external and historical knowledge of the biblical propo- 
 sitions which transmit the mysteries of faith, 1 *Cor. 2:14; Eph. 4 : 
 18; 5: 8." 
 
 In the Symbolical Books the principal passages are in the Form. 
 Conc. II. 
 
 [8] Form. Conc. (Sol. Dec. II, 7) : " We believe that man is en- 
 tirely corrupt and dead to that which is good, so that there has not 
 remained, neither can remain, in the nature of man since the fall, and 
 before regeneration, even a scintillation of spiritual power, by which he 
 can, of himself, prepare himself for the grace of God, or apprehend 
 offered grace, or be capable {in and of himself ') of ^receiving] that grace, 
 or of applying or accommodating himself to grace, or by his own powers 
 contributing anything, either in whole or in half, or in the smallest part, 
 to his own conversion, or of acting, operating, or co-operating \in it] {as 
 of himself , or of his own accord}." 
 
 The Form. Conc. (II, 77) therefore rejects the dogma of the Syner- 
 gists, " who pretend that in spiritual things man is not absolutely dead 
 to that which is good, but only deeply wounded and half dead. And 
 although the free will is too weak to begin and, by its own powers, con- 
 vert itself to God and obey with the whole heart the law of God, yet, if 
 
EXTENT OF THE FREEDOM OF THE WILL. 271 
 
 the Holy Spirit make a beginning, call us by the gospel and offer to us 
 his grace, the forgiveness of sins, and eternal life, then that free will 
 could by its own peculiar powers, meet God, in some way contribute 
 (something, at least, although little and languidly) to its own conver- 
 sion, aid it, co-operate, prepare itself for grace, and apply it, apprehend 
 it, embrace it, believe the gospel, and co-operate together with the Holy 
 Spirit in continuing and preserving its own operations." The following 
 positions, taken by Melanchthon, in the Examen Ordinandorum : 
 " Three causes concur in conversion, the Word of God, the Holy Spirit, 
 whom the Father and the Son send that he may enkindle our hearts, 
 and our own will assenting to and not resisting the Word of God ;" as 
 also in Article XVIII of the altered Augsb. Conf.: " A state of spiritual 
 justification is effected when we are assisted by the Holy Spirit," and 
 " Human nature cannot produce the interior emotions, true fear, etc., 
 unless the Holy Spirit govern and assist our hearts," are therefore re- 
 garded as synergistic. Chmn. (Loc. c. Th., I, 201) clearly comments 
 upon the first of these propositions : " The human will does not concur 
 in such a manner as to aid spiritual acts by its own powers. . . . But 
 the human will is numbered among the causes of a good act, because it 
 can resist the Holy Spirit (Acts 7 : 51) and destroy the work of God 
 (Rom. 14: 20). The children of God are led by the Holy Spirit, not 
 that they should believe or do good ignorantly and unwillingly, . . . 
 but grace makes them willing from being unwilling, because it works to 
 will, Rom. 7: 22." 
 
 [9] Quen. (II, 176) : " In the state of corruption, liberty in the will 
 of man is not only that of contradiction or action, but that also of con- 
 trariety or specification ; not, indeed, that which is employed between 
 spiritual good and evil, for this was lost by the fall, but that which is be- 
 tween this and that spiritual evil in particular. ," " By liberty of contra- 
 diction, we are to understand that liberty which is employed about one 
 and the same object, within opposing limits, as to will and not to will, 
 to do and not to do. By liberty of contrariety, however, that liberty 
 which is employed either about diverse objects or about diverse acts of 
 the same object." Holl. (570). 
 
 Grh. (V, 99): " There exists in man, therefore, freedom of will, 
 along with the servitude of sin, for he both sins and is unable to refrain 
 from sinning, while he nevertheless sins freely and delights to sin; al- 
 though he is not moved except to evil, yet he chooses it freely, i. e., will- 
 ingly and spontaneously, not unwillingly or under coercion, and is moved 
 to it with all his energy. Add to this that in the very choice of evils he 
 exercises a certain liberty." 
 
272 THE STATE OF CORRUPTION. 
 
 Hutt. (Loc. c, 272): "Even in evil and vicious actions, freedom of 
 the will is very readily conceded, inasmuch as the will, not yet regen- 
 erate, most freely, i. e., not by coercion, but spontaneously, wills, 
 chooses, approves, and does that which is evil. Whence it happens that 
 that which is voluntary enters into the definition of sin, so that that 
 cannot properly be called sin which is not voluntary. . . . But it is 
 here asked why this propensity to evil is said to be free, aye, freedom 
 itself, since it is rather a sad and horrid service. But it is very prop- 
 erly replied that both assertions are true in a different respect ; for this 
 propensity of our will is properly described as both enslaved and free. 
 Enslaved it is with respect to the lost image of God ; for, since by the 
 fall the faculty of choosing the good and avoiding the evil was taken 
 away, there was afterwards left a will which is so held captive under 
 the tyranny of sin that it is not moved, except to the choosing of evil 
 and avoiding the good. . . . But, though the will be such a slave, yet 
 it nevertheless is very properly called free, if we only have regard to the 
 proper seat of sin, which is in the will of man. But if any one wish 
 to assign to it also another cause, as when the Church sets the bounds 
 of liberty concerning evil actions, that it may assign limits to human 
 curiosity, so that it do not seek the cause of sin without itself, but rather 
 examine and discover it in itself; to this assuredly we will not object." 
 
 [10] Chmn. (Loc. c. Th., I, 183): "Augustine calls 'external 
 things' the works of the present life. Because in spiritual acts there 
 is no liberty, the will not being free, lest freedom should be entirely 
 taken away from the will even in external things, this doctrine is taught 
 concerning the freedom of the will in external discipline. But discipline 
 is diligence in governing external actions and restraining external mem- 
 bers in accordance with the precepts of the decalogue ; although the in- 
 terior movements either may not be present or may not consent. . . . 
 But in external things, Paul (Rom. 1 : 20) ascribes even to the unre- 
 generate mind thoughts, knowledge, truth, etc. It is very evident that 
 the mind was not despoiled of all intellect by the fall, but that there is 
 remaining, even in unregenerate men, some power of mind in perceiv- 
 ing and judging those things which have been subjected to reason and the 
 senses, as in inventing and learning the various arts, in domestic life, 
 politics, ethics, in counsels, prudence, etc. For this faculty makes the 
 difference between rational man and irrational animals." 
 
 Mel. (Loci. Th., 68): " Since there remains, in the nature of man, 
 a certain judgment and choice of things which are objects of reason 
 or sense, there remains also a choice of external civil works; wherefore 
 the human will is able, by its own powers, without renovation, to per- 
 
CIVIL RIGHTEOUSNESS. 273 
 
 form in some way the external duties of the law. This is the freedom 
 of the will which philosophers properly attribute to man. For even 
 Paul, discriminating between carnal and spiritual righteousness, admits 
 that the unregenerate have a certain power of choice, and perform cer- 
 tain external deeds of the law, such as to abstain from murder, theft, 
 robbery; and this he calls carnal righteousness." Hutt. (272): "Rea- 
 son and will in man are so inseparably united that neither can exist 
 without the other, but they mutually presuppose each other; so that any 
 concession of the existence of reason since the fall necessarily carries 
 with it the concession of the faculty of the will, unless any one should 
 wish to assert that the reason could choose or refuse anything without 
 the will, which would be supremely absurd." Conf. Aug. XVIII : 
 " Concerning free will, they teach that the human will has some liberty 
 to attain civil righteousness and to choose in regard to things subject to 
 reason. But it has no power without the Holy Spirit, to attain right- 
 eousness before God or spiritual righteousness." 
 
 The expression civil righteousness is more fully explained in the Ap. 
 of the Conf., XVIII, 70 : " We do not strip the human will of lib- 
 erty. The human will has liberty of choice in works and things which 
 reason by itself comprehends. It can in some measure attain to civil 
 righteousness, or the righteousness of works, it can speak about God, 
 it can offer to God a certain external worship, obey magistrates and 
 parents ; in choosing external acts it can withhold its hand from mur- 
 der, adultery, and theft. Since there remains in the nature of man 
 reason and judgment concerning things subject to sense, there remains 
 also the choice concerning such things and the power of attaining civil 
 righteousness. For it is this that the Scripture calls the righteousness 
 of the flesh, which the carnal nature, i. e., reason, by itself effects with- 
 out the Holy Spirit. Although the power of concupiscence is so great 
 that men more frequently obey their evil affections than their sound 
 judgment. And the devil, who ' worketh in the children of disobedi- 
 ence,' as Paul says (Eph. 2: 2), does not cease to incite this imbecile 
 nature to various sins. These are the reasons why civil righteousness 
 also is so rare among men." 
 
 For proof, Chmn (Loc. c. Th., I, 185): "(1) Because Paul affirms 
 that there is a certain carnal righteousness, Rom. 2 : 14; 10: 3 ; Phil. 
 3: 6. (2) Because Paul says that the law is the object of free will, 
 even among the unjust, 1 Tim. 1 : 9, i. e., the law was given to the un- 
 regenerate to restrain the will, the affections of the heart and locomo- 
 tion in externals." 
 
 The later divines point out, as "the objects about which the will of 
 
274 THE STATE OF . CORRUPTION. 
 
 man in the state of corruption is occupied, two hemispheres, one of 
 which is called the lower and the other the higher." To the latter be- 
 long the things purely spiritual or sacred (sacrce internee} concerning 
 which we remarked above. To the former are referred Holl. (577) : 
 "All things and actions, physical, ethical, political, domestic, artificial, 
 pedagogic, and divine, as far as they can he known by the light of reason 
 and can be produced by the powers of nature aided by the general concur- 
 rence of God.' 1 Grh. (V. 101): "For we confess that some liberty 
 remained as far as acts are concerned which are just, in the sense of 
 moral, political, and domestic justice, which, according to Luther, be- 
 long to the lower hemisphere. For example, an unregenerate man can 
 control his external locomotion as he will, he can govern the members 
 of his body by the dictate of right reason ; he can, in some degree, at- 
 tain civil justice, and avoid the more heinous external sins that are in 
 conflict with external discipline. Much more can he also hear with the 
 outward ear, and meditate upon the words of God." Yet this cannot 
 be admitted without some limitation. Holl. (583) : " The will of re- 
 generate and unregenerate men since the fall has the power, in regard 
 to different things which are subject to reason, of choosing or embracing 
 one rather than another, although that power is languid and infirm." 
 This weakness arises from impediments both external and internal. 
 Among internal impediments are reckoned the following, viz., "blindness 
 of the intellect, which causes error in deliberations, disinclination of 
 the will to pursue the good, and a proclivity to embrace the evil, ve- 
 hemence of the affections, often so great that like a torrent it carries 
 away with it the will and disturbs the judgment. The external impedi- 
 ments are the cunning of the devil, the blandishments and terrors of the 
 world, the control of God, subverting plans and diminishing or cutting 
 off the ability to act." Hutt. (269) divides all the actions of men into : 
 " evil, which are forbidden by the moral law; into mediate and indiffer- 
 ent, and into good." Concerning the mediate he says : " These again 
 are threefold, according as they pertain to the condition of our nature, 
 such as to stand, sit, sleep, eat, drink, and such like ; most of which are 
 common to man and brutes, having mainly respect to the vegetative, 
 positive, appetitive, and locomotive powers of the soul ; or, as they per- 
 tain to our civil and domestic conduct, such as to buy, sell, go to law, 
 go to war, to follow a trade, and whatever pertains to civil or domestic 
 life ; or, finally, such as pertain to the external government and disci- 
 pline of the Church, such as to teach and hear the Word of God, to ob- 
 serve certain ceremonies, to give and receive the sacraments, and similar 
 external works, affecting the external senses. We call the actions of 
 
THREEFOLD CONDITION OF THE WILL. 275 
 
 this second class mediate or indifferent, because by their nature, or in 
 themselves, they are neither good nor bad ; but whatever of good or 
 evil belongs to them, this they derive from other accidental causes." 
 Concerning good actions he says: "They are twofold, either morally 
 good, such as to live honestly, to give every one his due, not to injure 
 another ; or spiritually good, such as to have proper regard for the wor- 
 ship of God, for true religion, and the eternal salvation of souls." It 
 is only the latter that he denies to the unregenerate. Of the others he 
 says (273) : " It is clear that some liberty of the will must be conceded 
 to the unregenerate, not only as to the despotic (decTroTinbv) kind of ac- 
 tions, when, namely, the movement of the members is controlled by the 
 command of the will, whether the affections inwardly consent or not, 
 but also as to the freely chosen (TrpoaiperiKbv), when the will, in accord- 
 ance with a good affection, prefers honest actions." 
 
 [11] This description of free will applies to man in the state of cor- 
 ruption. The Dogmaticians distinguish, however, a threefold condition, 
 "the state before the fall, the state of corruption, the state of repara- 
 tion," and in each of these conditions free will is a different thing. 
 Qtjex. (II, 176): "In the state before the fall man was free (1) from 
 physical necessity ; (2) from compulsory necessity ; (3) from the servi- 
 tude of sin ; (4) from misery ; (5) from the necessity of immutability ; 
 not, however, (6) from the necessity of obligation" ( u which is the de- 
 terminative direction of the will for the attainment of good and the 
 avoidance of evil, according to the rule of a higher law," Holl. 
 (571).)." Quex. (II, 183): "In the state of reparation. The restora- 
 tion of the integrity lost by the fall is either that commenced in conver- 
 sion or that completed in glorification ; the former occurs in this life, 
 the latter in the life to come. In the state of incipient restoration there 
 exists in man, when converted, or after his conversion, a freedom in re- 
 lation to an object supernatural or purely spiritual, not only from phy- 
 sical necessity, but also from the necessity of immutability, because his 
 will is no longer determined to evil, as before his conversion, but it can 
 freely choose good, by the grace of the Holy Spirit assisting and co- 
 operating; it can also choose spiritual evil in consequence of there- 
 mains of a carnal disposition still adhering to him. In the state of con- 
 summated restoration, or in eternal life, there will succeed a full and 
 perfect freedom of the human will, not only from compulsion and from 
 the servitude of sin, but also from misery, and from the root and sense 
 of sin, and also a liberty from internal necessity or immutability, as well 
 that of contrariety (or, as to what relates to the kind of sin), as that of 
 contradiction (or, as to whether the power to sin shall be exercised or 
 not"). 
 
276 THE STATE OF CORRUPTION. 
 
 Form. Conc. (Sol. Dec. II, 67) : " There is a great difference be- 
 tween men baptized and unbaptized. For since, according to the teach- 
 ing of Paul (Gal. 3 : 27), all who are baptized put on Christ, and are 
 truly born again, these now have free will, i. <?., have again been made 
 free, as Christ testifies (John 8 : 36). Whence, also, they not only 
 hear the Word of God, but also, though not without much infirmity, 
 can assent to it and believingly embrace it." 
 
PART III. 
 
 OF THE SOUKCES OF SALVATION. 
 
 § 29. Sources of Salvation. 
 
 TF man is to be redeemed from the lost condition in which, he 
 -*~ lies since the fall, this can be accomplished only through 
 divine grace. This exhibits itself in three acts, one of which 
 proceeds from the Father, another from the Son, and the third 
 from the Holy Ghost. The Father is moved with compassion 
 towards fallen man, and this impels him to the gracious deter- 
 mination to effect redemption by the sending of the Son. The 
 Son accomplishes this redemption, and the Holy Spirit offers to 
 man the means whereby he can appropriate it to himself. 
 
 The third part of our work therefore treats: 
 I. Of the benevolence of God the Father towards fallen man, 
 who is to be delivered and blessed ; 
 
 II. Of the fraternal redemption by Christ ; 
 
 III. Of the grace of the Holy Spirit in the application of re- 
 demption* 
 
 *Holl. (585): " The sources of salvation are the acts of divine grace, upon 
 which the eternal salvation of men depends. The Saviour himself, John 3 : 16, 
 points to these three sources of salvation, God, by loving the world, and giving 
 his Son as Mediator, manifests his benevolence. The Son was given to rescue from 
 destruction the world, i. e.. the entire human race inhabiting this earth, and thus 
 to become its Redeemer. The means of enjoying the redemption of Christ is true 
 faith, fixed in Christ's merit, which the Holy Spirit (inasmuch as he is called the 
 spirit of faith, 2 Cor. 4: 13) enkindles by his efficacious working through the 
 Word and Sacraments." 
 
 Quen. (Ill, 1) : "All three persons of the Godhead have been occupied in the 
 procuring of human salvation. The Father loves those who have fallen, the Son 
 redeems those who have been loved, and the Holy Ghost calls and teaches those 
 who have been redeemed." 
 
278 THE GRACIOUS WILL OF GOD. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 Of the Benevolence of God towards Fallen Man * 
 
 § 30. Benevolence of God. 
 
 r I ^HE gracious will of God, to deliver fallen men from their 
 -*- ruined condition, is the first thing that we have to consider, 
 for it is this that originates the sending of the Son, who accom- 
 plishes the redemption, and the sending of the Holy Spirit, who 
 applies it to individual persons. 
 
 *Hutt. (1. c, ^j seq.) introduces the doctrine with the following words : "The 
 apostle in that golden epistle of his to the Romans, having treated the subject of 
 Divine Predestination very extensively and accurately, at length, as though hav- 
 ing passed into a stupor, as he surveys somewhat more deeply the exhaustless 
 abyss of the divine mysteries about this article, breaks forth in the almost unac- 
 customed exclamation : ' the depth of the riches, both of the wisdom and knowl- 
 edge of God 1 how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out.' 
 Rom. 11 : 33. This exclamation has caused most of the orthodox Fathers to treat 
 the article of Predestination too cautiously and briefly ; and even to day there are 
 some who regard its consideration imprudent and useless, nay, rather troublesome 
 and painful, who affirm that it cannot be presented, in an assembly of hearers, 
 without great danger ; and who apply to this the trite proverb, Noli me tariff ere. 
 While we, indeed, think that the modesty and care of the ancient Fathers deserve 
 praise, we, at the same time, neither can nor ought, in any way, to approve the 
 excessively severe judgment of some later teachers. For if the consideration of 
 this article ought to be regarded imprudent, certainly Christ and the apostles can 
 scarcely be defended from the suspicion of temerity, since they often, and indeed 
 accurately and publicly, presented and explained to their hearers the subject of 
 Predestination. . . . As, therefore, those things which God has wished to be secret 
 are not to be investigated, so those things which he has revealed are not to be de- 
 nied or concealed ; in order that we may not be found unlawfully curious in regard 
 to the former, or culpably ungrateful in regard to the latter. . . . These matters 
 being considered in such a manner that we can be occupied, profitably and with a 
 good conscience, in the explanation of the mystery of eternal predestination, we 
 are thoroughly convinced, nevertheless, that, just as we confine ourselves within 
 the bounds and limits of the Divine Word, we will err neither in excess nor defect. 
 But here we must especially observe the caution, to attend well to the source 
 whence judgment concerning this article can and should be sought and framed. 
 Moreover, the Book of Christian Concord teaches correctly, that outside of and be- 
 yond the Word of God no place for weighing this mystery should be left for human 
 reason. . . . Furthermore, neither is Predestination to be sought immediately in 
 
ANTECEDENT DIVINE BENEVOLENCE. 279 
 
 This, his gracious will, God at once announced in his promise 
 (recorded in Gen. 3 : 15) ; but God did not then, for the first 
 time, form this purpose of redeeming man; for, as he foresaw 
 from eternity that he would fall, he determined at the same time 
 both to create and to redeem him. [1] This purpose of God, 
 however, will, in time, be accomplished only in the case of those 
 who fulfil the condition upon which redemption is to be applied. 
 Therefore we distinguish this gracious will of God into general 
 and special benevolence. 
 
 I. The gracious will of God is called the universal or general 
 will (benevolence) when it is considered in itself, as it refers to all 
 men alike miserable, and it is exhibited in preparing the means 
 of redemption for all, and effectually offering the same to them, 
 
 God himself, whom no one has ever seen. But it is the Word of God alone from 
 which the entire treatment of this mystery is to be solely sought ; as, in it, nothing 
 has been omitted that at all pertains to the mystery of our salvation and election : 
 nay, rather, according to the testimony of the apostle, the whole counsel of God 
 has been revealed in it to us. Acts 20 : 27. . . . This word is nothing else than 
 the Gospel of Christ. As, therefore, we have the will of God revealed in the word 
 of the Gospel, we declare that this itself must be considered the eternal and immu- 
 table decree ; and the counsel and purpose of God is the ground both of our eter- 
 nal election and salvation ; because in God there are not contradictory wills." 
 
 Form. Conc. (Sol. Dec. XI, 9, seq.) : " Still this eternal election or ordination 
 of God to life eternal must be considered not merely in that secret, heavenly, and 
 inscrutable counsel of God, as though the election comprehended or required noth- 
 ing more, and in thinking upon it nothing more is to be taken into account than 
 the fact that God has foreseen what men and how many will attain salvation, and 
 who and how many will perish eternally, or as though the Lord would make a 
 military review, and would say or determine, 'This one is to be saved, but that 
 one is to be damned ; this one shall persevere steadfast in faith to the end, but that 
 one shall not persevere.' For, from this opinion, many derive absurd, dangerous, 
 and pernicious thoughts, which produce and strengthen, in the minds of men, 
 either security and impenitence ur distress and despair. . . . (13) Wherefore, as we 
 wish to think or speak correctly and with profit concerning the eternal election or 
 predestination, and ordination of the sons of God to eternal life, let us accustom 
 ourselves not to endeavor, by our reason, to investigate the mere, secret fore- 
 knowledge of God, which no man has explored and learned to know. But let us 
 meditate upon the divine election according to the manner in which the counsel, 
 purpose, and ordination of God are revealed to us, through the Word, in Christ 
 Jesus (who is the true book of life). Therefore, let us comprehend, at the same 
 time, in thought, the whole doctrine concerning the purpose, counsel, will, and 
 ordination of God (namely, all things which pertain to our redemption, call, justi- 
 fication, and salvation)." 
 
280 THE GRACIOUS WILL OF GOD. 
 
 without for the present considering the manner in which men 
 treat the grace thus offered to them. [2] Holl. (586): "The uni- 
 versal benevolence of God is that act of divine grace by which 
 God, having witnessed the common misery of fallen men, is 
 moved not only earnestly to desire the salvation of them all, but 
 also to give Christ as Mediator for its accomplishment, and to 
 appoint appropriate and efficacious means wiih the intention 
 that all men should use them, attain through them true faith in 
 Christ, and possess and enjoy eternal salvation, procured through 
 him, to the praise of the divine goodness." This will is also 
 called antecedent, inasmuch as, in the nature of the case, it ante- 
 dates all question as to the manner in which man may treat the 
 offered grace. [3] It refers to all men alike (universally to all, 
 without a single exception. John 3 : 16 ; 1 Tim. 2:4; Eom. 
 11 : 32 ; Acts 17 : 30, 31 ; Tit. 2 : 11 ; 2 Pet. 3:9; Ezek. 33 : 
 11), [4] depends alone upon God's compassion for the wretched 
 condition of man, and has in no sense been called forth by any 
 merit or worthiness of man. [5] This will of God, moreover, 
 earnestly and sincerely proposes that all men obtain salvation 
 through Christ, [6] and God offers unto all the necessary means, 
 and is ready to render these available 'for them. [7] Meanwhile 
 this will of God is still not as absolute and unconditional as is 
 the compassion of God towards man, from which the plan of sal- 
 vation has proceeded ; that is, this will of God aims at saving 
 men through the merits of Christ and the appropriation of the 
 means of redemption as furnished to them. [8] The statements 
 concerning the universal will of God may accordingly be 
 summed up under the following characteristics: 
 
 It is (1) gratuitous and free (Gal. 3: 22; Eom. 11: 32; 8: 32); 
 (2) impartial (Eom. 3 : 22); (3) sincere and earnest (Ezek. 18: 23, 
 32; 33: 11); (4) efficacious (Eom. 2: 4); (5) not absolute, but 
 ordinate and conditioned (John 3: 16 ; 1 Tim. 2:6; Eom. 5: 8; 
 1 John 1 : 4, 9, 10. [9] The universal will of God is distin- 
 guished from— 
 
 II. The Special Will of God.— Thus this same [10] will of God 
 in reference to the salvation of men is designated, when we view 
 it in connection with the divinely foreseen conduct of men 
 towards the offered grace, as the condition upon which they are 
 
UNIVERSAL BENEVOLENCE OF GOD. 281 
 
 to be saved. Holl. (586): "This special benevolence of God is 
 that which, induces him to bestow eternal salvation upon sinners 
 who embrace the means of salvation offered to them." Al- 
 though the will of God is general, inasmuch as God's disposition 
 is equally gracious toward all men, and inasmuch as for their sal- 
 vation he has prepared a plan of redemption in the sending of 
 his Son, available equally for all ; yet it already follows from the 
 above distinction, according to which the general will of God is 
 not absolute, but ordinate and conditioned, that the accomplishment 
 of this gracious will is conditioned by the conduct of man towards 
 the offered grace. If the aim of the will of God, considered in 
 itself, without regard to this conduct of men, be that all are to 
 be saved by the plan of redemption through Christ, yet its aim, 
 more specifically described, is that only those shall he saved who 
 accept of the salvation offered and persevere therein, and it refers 
 only to these. This will of God, thus more specifically described 
 (the special will of God), is also called consequent, because the 
 divine foreknowledge of the proper conduct on the part of man 
 precedes it; and it is also designated as particular, because it refers 
 not to all men, but only to those of whom God foreknows that 
 they will properly treat the offered grace. [11] (Eph. 1 :1 ; James 
 2: 5; Kev. 2 : 10; 1 Tim. 1 : 16; John 17: 20.) 
 
 From this special benevolence of God, which is based upon the 
 universal benevolence of God, and proceeds from it, there comes 
 forth the purpose of God, [12] which is called predestination [IS] 
 or election ; [14] the purpose, namely, to save through the merits 
 of Christ the definite number of those whose right treatment of 
 the offered grace God had foreseen. Holl. (604): " Predestina- 
 tion is the eternal decree of God to bestow eternal salvation upon 
 all of whom God foresaw that they would finally believe in 
 Christ." [15] 
 
 In virtue of the universal benevolence, salvation is provided for 
 and offered to all, but the purpose of redemption is accomplished 
 not with all, but only in the case of a definite number of men ; 
 the reason of this, however, lies in the special benevolence, in vir- 
 tue of which only those really are to be saved who truly accept 
 by faith the offered salvation, and persevere in this faith. [16] 
 But God, by his foreknowledge, eternally foresees who these will 
 19 
 
282 THE SOURCES OF SALVATION. 
 
 be, and this foreknowledge is the ground upon which the pur- 
 pose of God, embracing only a definite number of men, is eter- 
 nal. [17] 
 
 The decree of God is still further defined as (1), not absolute, 
 but ordinate (determined by a certain order of means) and relative 
 (1 Cor. 1 : 21), [18] i. e., there is no arbitrariness on the part of 
 God, if he include a number of persons among the elect, and ex- 
 clude others, for his purpose depends upon the observance of the 
 order to which salvation is bound, ("The apostle does not say 
 that God absolutely wills to save all, in whatsoever manner they 
 may conduct themselves, but that God wills that all may be 
 saved, that is, by certain means." Quen.), and he has respect, 
 therefore, in forming his purpose, to man's conduct towards this 
 appointed order of salvation. But this decree is also (2), not 
 conditional, but categorical and simple, i. e., God does not allow it 
 to be still doubtful, in time, whether he will bestow salvation 
 upon this or that man, as though his purpose were only to save 
 this or that man, if or after he may have laid hold upon the 
 merit of Christ ; but, by virtue of his foreknowledge, he recog- 
 nizes in advance those who will lay hold upon the merit of Christ, 
 and only to these does his purpose refer, and thus it is simple and 
 categorical. [19] Hence it follows, therefore, also (3), that the 
 election (taken in its strictest sense), because it rests upon an eter- 
 nal decree of God, is immutable and irrevocable (so that an elect 
 person cannot become a reprobate, Matt. 25 : 34: James 2 : 5; 
 Matt. 24: 24; 1 Pet. 1:2,4; John 10: 28; Dan. 12 : 1; Kom.8: 
 29, 30), for God would not have correctly foreseen if his purpose 
 would have to suffer change (election is immutable, because based 
 upon an ordinate decree and because of the infallibility of the 
 divine foreknowledge). Though the elect may for a while fall 
 into sin and from grace, this cannot continue forever, and they 
 cannot fail of eternal salvation. [20] 
 
 The attributes or adjuncts of election and of the elect may be 
 thus compendiously stated (Quen., Ill, 20) : 
 
 "I. The attributes of election: (a) Eternity (Eph. 1: 4; 2 Tim. 
 1:9; 2Thess. 2: 13; Matt. 25: 34); (b) Particularity (Matt. 20: 
 16); (c) Immutability (2 Tim. 2: 19; Matt. 24: 24; 1 Pet. 1:4; 
 Eom. 8 : 29, 30). 
 
PREDESTINATION. 283 
 
 "II. The attributes of the elect : (a) Paucity (Matt. 20 : 16 ; 22 : 
 14) ; (b) Possibility of totally losing, for a while, indwelling grace 
 (Ps. 51: 12; 1 Cor. 10: 12); (c) The certainty of election [21] 
 (Luke 10 : 20 ; Rom. 8:38; 2 Tim. 4 : 8 ; Phil. 2 : 12) ; (d) Final 
 perseverance in the faith (Matt. 10: 22 ; Rev. 2 : 10)." 
 
 In contrast with predestination stands reprobation. [22] As 
 God foreknows those who will perseveringly believe in Christ ; 
 and as, in view of this, he forms his purpose to save these, so also, 
 in the same way, his purpose of condemnation embraces the defi- 
 nite number of those who are lost; and therefore reprobation is 
 " that act of the consequent divine will by which God (before the 
 foundation of the world) through his vindicative justice, and for 
 its perpetual glory, adjudged to eternal condemnation all contu- 
 macious sinners, of whom he foresaw that they would finally re- 
 ject the proffered grace of the call and of justification, and would 
 depart this life without faith in Christ." (Holl. 643.) 
 
 All the specifications referring to this topic correspond to those 
 given concerning predestination. The " internal exciting cause 
 is the vindicative or punitive justice of God (Rom. 2: 8); the 
 external exciting cause is the rejection of the merit of Christ, i. e., 
 the foreseen aTr^Ha or final incredulity (Mark 16: 16; John 3: 
 36)." [23] The form of reprobation, however, consists in " ex- 
 clusion from the inheritance of eternal salvation, and in adjudi- 
 cation to eternal punishment according to the purpose and fore- 
 knowledge of God (Matt. 25: 41)." 
 
 Thus the attributes of reprobation and of the reprobate cor- 
 respond to those of election and the elect. The attributes of 
 reprobation are : " (a) Eternity (Matt. 25 : 41 ; Jude 5:4); (b) 
 Immutability (Numb. 23 : 19 ; 1 Sam. 15 : 29 ; Mai. 3 : 6)." 
 The attributes of the reprobate are: "(a) Plurality (Matt. 7 : 13); 
 (b) Possibility of being for awhile in the state of the truly regen- 
 erate ; (c) Perseverance in final unbelief." 
 
 Obseevation I. — The foregoing representation, as here de- 
 veloped, belongs to a later period. Grh. is the first who, with 
 special reference to earlier scholastic distinctions, presented the 
 doctrine "in this form, while the earlier theologians, in their state- 
 ment of this doctrine, adhered to the definition which in Note 13 
 we designated as the second. That is as follows : " God deter- 
 
284 THE SOURCES OF SALVATION. 
 
 mined from eternity to save those who would believe upon 
 Christ." Thus the Form. Conc. When, however, the later 
 theologians undertook systematically to present what can be said 
 concerning predestination, the statement of the Form. Conc. did 
 not seem to them sufficient, because the purpose of God to save 
 all who would believe on Christ could not be so indefinite in his 
 own mind as was expressed by the words, " all those who would 
 believe." This purpose of God, they supposed, must rather be 
 so positive that the definite number of those who should, be saved 
 must be known to him, as otherwise it might be maintained that 
 God would allow it to remain undecided until in time which 
 persons are to be saved, which would be inconsistent with the 
 assumed eternity of the purpose. From this effort to express 
 themselves accurately originated the definition of predestination 
 in the strictest sense, as also the distinction between irpo^ectg- and 
 aTrpoopifidg. But to avoid the error of assuming that if the number 
 of the elect was fixed from eternity, their reception among that 
 number in time was for that reason no longer conditioned by 
 the conduct of men with reference to the offered grace, but de- 
 pended upon an absolute and hidden decree of God, the further 
 specification was added that God, by virtue of his foreknowledge, 
 antedating the purpose itself, from eternity foresaw who those 
 would be who would accept the offered grace. (A specification 
 which, indeed, is not unknown to the Form. Conc, cf. Sol. Dec. 
 XI, 54, but which was not then introduced into the definition of 
 predestination.) And then there was added by the later theo- 
 logians the distinction between the general and special will of 
 God, which was meant to show that the will of God to save was, 
 indeed, in itself considered, and without reference to the conduct 
 of men, general and applicable to all; but that, as the actual 
 conferring of salvation was dependent upon the conduct of men 
 with reference to it, as soon as reference was had to this, it then 
 became special, and referred then only to those who conducted 
 themselves properly with reference to the offered salvation. By 
 all these further specifications, however, the doctrine of predes- 
 tination was only more accurately stated, and not in any wise 
 altered. 
 
 Observation II. — The question whether the foreknowledge 
 
ANTECEDENT BENEVOLENT WILL. 285 
 
 of God does not necessarily determine the fate of men, so that 
 human freedom is thereby abolished, is not discussed by any of 
 the theologians in this connection. Chmn. (Log. c, I, 162) en- 
 deavors, in the discussion of the cause of sin, to meet the above 
 objection by remarking that the foreknowledge is no act of the 
 will, and that therefore the future is not determined by it. " The 
 fact, whether past or future, does not depend upon knowledge, 
 but knowledge upon the fact, . . . and it was rightly said by 
 Origen, 'yet we judge by common consent concerning fore- 
 knowledge, not that anything will happen because God knows 
 that it will, but that, because it will happen, God already knows 
 it.'" And so also the later Dogmaticians. Quen. (I, 539): 
 " That same divine foreknowledge or foresight does not depend 
 upon any divine decree, nor does it of itself impose any necessity 
 upon things foreseen, nor remove their contingency, although in 
 itself it is certain and infallible." (Compare the specific state- 
 ments in § 21, Note 4.) The Form. Conc. appears to regard 
 this question as belonging to the domain of the inexplicable and 
 mysterious, the prying into which constitutes no part of human 
 duty. Sol. Dec. XI, 54, 55. 
 
 [1] Grh. (IV, 146): " After Adam with all his descendants had been 
 ensnared, by the fall, in the toils of eternal death, and no other remedy 
 could be found for this evil, by the wisdom either of men or angels ; 
 God, coming forth from the secret seat of his majesty, revealed the ador- 
 able mystery concerning the restoration ol the human race, through his 
 Son, Gen. 3 : 15. From the fact, therefore, that God, in fulfillment of 
 this first promise, sent in the fulness of time his own Son, born of a 
 woman, Gal. 4 : 4, we infer that God from eternity had made a decree 
 concerning sending his Son into the flesh, that, by his obedience and 
 satisfaction, the wounds might be healed, which the infernal serpent had 
 inflicted upon man, and the blessings lost by the fall might be restored." 
 
 [2] Quen. (Ill, 1): " The most kind and merciful, universal will of 
 God the Father towards fallen men, embraces within its bounds all men 
 in general who have been placed in misery, and has, according to our 
 method of conception, two acts ; of which the first is the pity of God, by 
 which he inwardly and sincerely lamented that the human race, and in- 
 deed the whole of it, had been deceived so basely by the fraud of the 
 devil, and, through the fall, had been cast into instant, and that, too, 
 eternal ruin ; and by which he willed to deliver it from evil, and, pro- 
 
286 THE SOURCES OF SALVATION. 
 
 vided it could be done without any injury to his justice, to recover for 
 the same its lost salvation. The second act is that by which God, moved 
 by this pity and love to man, made a decree concerning liberating the 
 human race, through the sending of his Son, and the revelation of 
 the same through the Gospel, to the end that all might believe in him 
 and thus be saved. For to the interposition of his Son, offering and 
 promising a most perfect satisfaction, God mercifully ordained from 
 eternity in his Son to restore all, and give them eternal life." 
 
 [3] Grh. (IV, 169): " The antecedent will is so named, because it 
 precedes the consideration of the obedience and disobedience of men, 
 and consists simply in tjiat aspect of the divine will in which we regard 
 the beneficent will of God as disposing itself equally towards all." 
 
 Holl. (586): " The antecedent will is that by which God wills the 
 salvation of all fallen and wretched men, and for attaining this has given 
 Christ as a mediator, and has ordained those means by which the salva- 
 tion acquired through Christ, and strength for believing, are offered to 
 all men with the sincere intention of conferring such salvation and faith." 
 
 [4] Hutt. (Loc. c, 792): "In this antecedent will of love and mercy 
 in God, not even a single individual of the entire human race has been 
 neglected or passed by, even the son of perdition not being excepted, 
 John 17 : 12. The full force of this assertion is, that God desired the 
 salvation of all mortals ; that he destined his Son as the Redeemer for 
 the whole world equally ; that he willed to offer these blessings to all in 
 common, even to those who indeed do not actually hear this word, who 
 do not actually believe, who are not actually saved ; yea, even to those 
 who God foreknew would not hear his word, would never believe, and 
 also never be saved." 
 
 The passages which ordinarily are quoted against the universality of 
 grace, are Eom. 9 : 19, 18 ; 9 : 11-13, 22. In reference to Rom. 9:19, 
 Quen. (Ill, 12): "From this passage the Calvinists frame an argument 
 like this : ' The will of which Paul speaks is absolute ; but it is the will 
 to save and to destroy, of which Paul speaks. Therefore, the will to 
 save and to destroy is absolute. Reply : The minor premise is false. 
 For, indeed, it is the same will in both cases; yet there is a difference be- 
 tween willing the same absolutely, and with a condition." In reference 
 to Rom. 9 : 18, Holl. (594) : " (a) The apostle speaks not of the general 
 or universal but of the special mercy of God, by which he justifies those 
 believing in Christ (v. 30), and therefore he does not treat of the ante- 
 cedent but of the consequent will of God. (b) The mercy of God is 
 indeed free, but it is not absolute. . . . (c) God hardens whom he wills 
 by sending upon them hardness, not causatively but judicially." . . . 
 
DIVINE BENEVOLENCE IS EFFICACIOUS. 287 
 
 In reference to Rom. 9 : 11-13 (Quen. Ill, 12); " (a) The text speaks 
 of Esau and Jacob, not in their persons but of their descendants. . . . 
 (5) It does not give this testimony concerning eternal predestination to 
 salvation, or reprobation to destruction. Therefore, the Calvinists are 
 inconsiderate in assuming that the love for Jacob, and the hatred to- 
 wards Esau, relate to love of the former for life, eternal and absolute, 
 and the reprobation of the latter to death eternal and absolute ; but the 
 apostle treats, Rom. 9 : 10, 11, of the rejection of the Jews, from the out- 
 ward superiority which they enjoyed in the course of so many ages, and 
 the reception by the Gentiles of those prerogatives which the Jews 
 claimed for themselves alone. If the discussion had been concerning 
 election, from the opinion of the Calvinists this absurdity would follow, 
 viz., that all the descendants of Jacob have been saved, and, on the 
 other hand, all the descendants of Esau have been condemned. There- 
 fore the sense of the passage is : I have not brought or granted as much 
 blessing to the descendants of Esau as I have to the descendants of 
 Jacob, and thus I have preferred the latter to the former, I have loved 
 them less (the word hatred is thus employed, Luke 14 : 26 ; Matt. 10 : 
 37)." In reference to Rom. 9 : 22, " From these words it is clear that 
 God has indeed prepared vessels of mercy for glory, but vessels of wrath 
 are not said to have been prepared by God, but to have been tolerated 
 by God with much long suffering. Wherefore, men hardened not by 
 God, but by themselves, and by their own wickedness and voluntary 
 perversity, have become vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, be- 
 cause they despise the counsel of God against themselves, Luke 7 : 30." 
 
 [5] Holl. (599) : "Tli£ mercy of God has been called forth by no 
 merits, Gal. 3 : 22 ; Rom. 11 : 32. Pity for the sinner does not move 
 God causally, but only affords an occasion, and presents an object for 
 pity, towards which, while he is able, yet he is under no obligation to 
 exercise (ptXavdpuTrla. For in man there is no impelling cause whatever." 
 
 [6] Holl. (599) : " The benevolence of God towards the human race 
 has not been feigned or counterfeited, but is earnest and sincere ; be- 
 cause, in the caring for human salvation, the will of the sign with the 
 w r ill of the divine purpose, the precept and promise with the divine in- 
 tention, most harmoniously conspire. He acts the hypocrite who prom- 
 ises one thing with his mouth and another with his heart; to think this 
 of God is a crime." Hutt. (Loc. c, 792): " The truth of this state- 
 ment is evident from clear testimonies of Scripture, 1 Tim. 2 : 4; 2 Pet. 
 3:9; Matt. 23 : 37 ; Ez. 18 : 32. Finally, the same is manifest from 
 the use of the oath in most solemn attestation, Ez. 33 : 11." 
 
 [7] Holl. (599) : " The benevolence of God is not an empty vow, a 
 
288 THE SOURCES OF SALVATION. 
 
 fruitless wish, an indifferent complacency, by which one does not long 
 to effect or obtain the thing which pleases him, and which in itself he 
 loves, and, therefore, is not willing to employ the means leading to that 
 end ; but it is an efficacious desire, by which God seriously intends, 
 through sufficient and efficacious means, to effect and obtain the salva- 
 tion of men, in which he is most ardently delighted, Rom. 2 : 4. The 
 antithesis of the Galvinists states that God indeed, by his will, manifested 
 in Scripture, or that of the sign (signi), wishes all to be saved ; but by 
 his secret will, which they call that of his purpose (beneplaciti), that he 
 wishes to save the elect alone." (Quen., Ill, 7). 
 
 [8] Holl. (600): "Although the first compassion of God, by which 
 he pitied the human race that had fallen into sin, and in fact the ap- 
 pointment of a mediator, and the administration of the means of salva- 
 tion are absolute, yet the merciful will of God to confer remission of 
 sins and eternal salvation is not absolute, but relative and limited by 
 justice. Because it has respect to the satisfaction of Christ, by which 
 divine justice was satisfied." 
 
 Quen. (Ill, 5) : " It is founded in Christ, and is limited to the ends 
 and means by which he is moved." In regard to the will of God, in 
 general, (Hutt. Loc. c, 782): "The will of God, in this mystery, is 
 not considered according to its own most simple essence ; it is distin- 
 guished only according to our understanding, and access to it does not 
 lie open to our mind ; but by reason of his act, with respect to things 
 created, God goes forth beyond his own essence. According to the 
 former method of consideration the will in God is just as indivisible as 
 it is impossible for the essence of God itself to be divided into parts. 
 But, according to the latter method of consideration, namely, as the will 
 of God goes forth beyond its essence to creatures, it is twofold. For, 
 whatever God wills to take place in created things, he wills either sim- 
 ply or with a determined mode or condition. The former will is com- 
 monly called, in the schools, absolute, and is joined with the immutable 
 necessity of the event; according to this he calls those things which 
 are not, as though they were, Rom. 4 : 17 . . . The latter will is ful- 
 filled in no other way than by the fulfilment of the predetermined mode 
 or precise condition ; when this is not fulfilled, it likewise comes to pass 
 that that does not occur which God has notwithstanding especially willed 
 should occur. The former is to be altogether separated from this mys- 
 tery, and to be relegated to the schools of the Stoics and Calvinists . . . 
 but the latter, namely, the modified or limited will of God, enters into 
 the act of the present mystery." 
 
 [9] Holl. (600) : " The benevolence of God is ordinate, because 
 
ANTECEDENT AND CONSEQUENT. 289 
 
 God from his most profound counsel established a fixed rd^tc or series of 
 means, to which, in the conferring of happiness upon sinners, he has 
 regard. These means are the Word of God and the Sacraments, by 
 which God seriously intends to call sinners to the kingdom of grace, 
 arid convert, regenerate, justify, and save them. By this ordinate will 
 God wishes not only that all men be saved, but also that all men come 
 to the knowledge of the truth. The will is called conditionate, not as 
 though God wills only the end, and does not will the means, or wills the 
 end under a condition which he himself from his pure purpose is un- 
 willing should be fulfilled in many ; but as God, willing that men should 
 be saved, does not will that they should be saved without regard to the 
 fulfilment of any satisfaction or condition, but should be led to salvation 
 under the condition of determined means." Hence the proposition con- 
 cerning the universality of grace is more specifically expressed thus : 
 " God wills, through ordinary means, to confer saving faith upon all 
 men." (lb.) 
 
 [10] Grh. (IV, 169) : "Moreover this division (into antecedent and 
 consequent will) distinguishes not the will by itself, which in God is 
 one and undivided, just as the essence also is one, but its twofold rela- 
 tion. In the antecedent will regard is had to the means for salvation, 
 in so far as, on the part of God, they have been appointed and are 
 offered to all. In the consequent will regard is had to the same means, 
 but in so far as they are accepted or neglected by men." Hutt. (1. c, 
 T83) ; »< This distinction was introduced into the Church because of 
 those passages of Scripture which bear witness that the will of God is 
 not always done or fulfilled, e. g., Matt. 23 : 37 ; 1 Tim. 2 : 4." 
 
 [11] Holl. (586) : " The consequent will is that by which God, 
 from the fallen human race, elects those to eternal life who he foresees 
 will use the ordinary means, and will persevere to the end of life in faith 
 in Christ." More specific definitions. Holl. (587) : " The will of 
 God is said to be' antecedent and consequent. (1) Not with regard to time, 
 as though the antecedent will preceded the consequent in time ; for, as 
 God is free from any limitations of time, he does not have any will 
 which anticipates another in time. (2) Neither with regard to the divine 
 will itself, as though two actually distinct wills in God were affirmed ; 
 for the divine will is the essence itself of God, with a connoted object, 
 conceived under the mode of an act of volition. (3) But the will of God 
 is said to be antecedent and consequent, from the order of our reason, 
 distinguishing the diverse acts of volition in God, according to a diverse 
 consideration of the objects, and regarding one act before the other, so 
 that it is only indicated that the antecedent will precedes the consequent 
 
290 THE DIVINE GOOD WILL. 
 
 in that which is the image of the divine reason: because, according to 
 our mode of conception, God's willing eternal salvation to men, and his 
 providing the means of grace, are anterior to the will of the same to 
 confer in act eternal salvation upon those who would to the end believe 
 in Christ, or to assign eternal condemnation to the impenitent." 
 
 Quen. (Ill, 2) : "The antecedent will relates to man, in so far as he 
 is wretched, no regard being had to circumstances in the object; but 
 the consequent will is occupied with certain circumstances in reference to 
 man, namely, as he is believing or unbelieving." [(Holl., 588): 
 "Wherefore the antecedent and consequent wills of God are not op- 
 posed to each other in a contrary or contradictory manner, but are 
 subordinated to one another. The latter is materially contained in the 
 former, and passes into it when the condition is assumed. This I prove 
 thus : By his antecedent will, God wills that all men be saved if they 
 believe to the end. But those using aright the ordinary means of sal- 
 vation, are those who finally believe. Therefore the antecedent will of 
 God is not overthrown, abolished, or removed by the consequent, but 
 rather passes into the same when the condition is fulfilled."] " The 
 antecedent respects the giving, and the consequent, the receiving of salva- 
 tion on the part of man. The former is universal ; the latter, particular. 
 The former precedes ; the latter follows a purified condition. In the 
 former salvation is regarded with reference to the means, as, on the 
 part of God, these have been established and offered equally to all men. 
 In the latter the same salvation is regarded with respect to the means, 
 but in so far as these are either accepted or neglected by men. The 
 will of God, pertaining to that which is antecedent (antecedaned), defines 
 what men ought to do, viz., to hear the Word of God, through its hear- 
 ing to receive faith, to apply to themselves the merit of Christ, and by 
 means of this faith to be saved. The consequent will considers what 
 men in fact do or do not, whether they obey the antecedent will or not, 
 i. e., it considers who in fact use the means of salvation established by 
 God and who do not, who hear the Word of Gpd and believe in Christ 
 and who do not." Hutt. (1. c, 794): "In the antecedent will 
 (irpo7ryovfiiv7f) faith is considered as a part of the order which God, so far 
 as it pertains to himself, desires should be observed. In the consequent 
 will ( Eiropkvrj) the same is considered not only in the manner that God 
 desires his own order to be observed by men, but, in so far as that order 
 either is in fact observed by believing, or is not observed by not believ- 
 ing. Although, indeed, this occurs in time with regard to men; yet, 
 by reason of his prescience, it was especially present to God, inasmuch 
 as, by the nature of eternity, nothing is future to him, but all things are 
 
PREDESTINATION IN A WIDER AND NARROWER SENSE. 291 
 
 from eternity especially present to him in the most simple now (rti vvv). 
 By reason of this ultimate difference, the consequent will always attains 
 its end, either for salvation or condemnation ; but the antecedent will, 
 not in like manner." Concerning the necessity of this distinction, 
 Holl. (587) : "This distinction (between the general and special will) 
 is necessary, on account of the wonderful combination of divine justice 
 and mercy, which are to be reconciled with each other. For there are 
 expressions in the Holy Scriptures that show that the mercy of God is 
 inclined towards all sinners, 1 Tim. 2: 6; 2 Pet. 3: 9. There are 
 other expressions which indicate the justice of God, and exclude from 
 the inheritance of salvation those who resist the divine order, John 3 : 
 18; Mark 16: 16. Finally, there are biblical passages in which both 
 the mercy and justice of G6d are declared, Matt. 23: 37. Christ, by 
 his antecedent will, as far as it pertained to himself, willed that the chil- 
 dren of Israel be gathered together; but, by his consequent will, because 
 they were unwilling to be gathered, he willed that their house be left to 
 them desolate, cf. Acts 13: 46. This distinction is implied in the para- 
 bles of Christ, Matt. 22 : 1 ; Luke 14: 16." 
 
 [12] Quen. (Ill, 14): " From the admitted universal benevolence 
 of God, in the establishment and presenting of means, whereby God 
 has determined to convert, regenerate, justify, and save men, through 
 his own efficacy, there arises a special benevolence conspicuous in the 
 predestination to eternal life." . . . 
 
 [13] The Dogmaticians observe that the word predestination has 
 been employed in the church in various senses : sometimes in a wider 
 sense, according to which it denotes the purpose of God, referring 
 equally to the saving of believers and the condemnation of unbelievers: 
 sometimes in a narrower sense, according to which it refers alone to the 
 former. In the latter sense they understand it to be employed in Bib- 
 lical usage. Rom. 8: 30; Eph. 1: 5. Holl. (607): " Some Fathers 
 and teachers have employed the word predestination improperly 
 (atcvpog), inappropriately, and in a wider sense than is lawful, to denote 
 the divine purpose both for saving believing men and condemning unbe- 
 lievers. But in Biblical usage the term predestination is always taken 
 in a good sense, to denote the divine decree concerning the salvation of 
 fallen men." But, even then, there is still a threefold distinction to be 
 observed in the definition of predestination ; and the more the Dogma- 
 ticians appropriate at one time the one, and again the other, so much 
 the more is this distinction to be considered, in order that the thought 
 may not hence arise, that the Dogmaticians stood in opposition to each 
 other in regard to the subject itself. Sometimes they understood by 
 
292 THE DIVINE GOOD WILL. 
 
 predestination, in the most general manner, the purpose of God to es- 
 tablish a scheme of redemption whereby all might be saved. Br. (711): 
 " The decree refers to the entire work of leading man to salvation." 
 Thus the notion is defined by the Formula Concordice (Sol. Dec. XI, 14) : 
 " Therefore we embrace in mind, at the same time, the entire doctrine 
 of the design, counsel, will, and ordination of God (viz., all things which 
 pertain to our redemption, call, justification, and salvation, cf. seq.)," 
 and, after it, Hutt. and others. Holl. (609) gives the following defi- 
 nition : " Predestination, taken in a wider sense, can be defined as the 
 eternal, divine decree, by which God, from his immense mercy, de- 
 termined to give His Son as Mediator, and, through universal preaching, 
 to offer him for reception to all men, who, from eternity he foresaw 
 would fall into sin ; also through the Word and Sacraments to confer 
 faith upon all who would not resist ; to justify all believers, and besides 
 to renew those using the means of grace; to preserve faith in them until 
 the end of life, and, in a word, to save those believing to the end." 
 Sometimes those are more particularly described in whose case the de- 
 cree of redemption is really to be accomplished ; they are those con- 
 cerning whom God knows that they will believe. Holl. (608): "In 
 the special or stricter sense, it signifies the ordination of believers to 
 salvation, combined with Trpddeaig- and irp6yvuaig-. The rrpodeacg- (the 
 divine, general and undefined decree concerning communicating eternal 
 salvation to all sinful men who, to the end, will believe in Christ), is 
 therefore more specifically defined through the wpdyvoatg- (the foreknowl- 
 edge of certain human persons or individuals, who will retain true faith 
 in Christ to the last breath of life"). In the latter case, however, by 
 predestination (taken in the strictest sense) only that decree is under- 
 stood which was really based upon the general 7rp6d-eaig- in accordance 
 with the antecedent irpoyvuair, in so far as it embraces the specific number 
 of men who are to be saved, which decree is called TTpooptajj.bg: Holl. 
 (608): "In the most special and strict sense, by which rrpoopiajubg- is dis- 
 tinguished from irpddeoiQ and Trpdyvomg, and denotes the eternal purpose of 
 God, determinate or applied to certain men as individuals, whom God 
 from the common mass of corruption elects to eternal life, because he 
 distinctly foresees that they will believe to the end in Christ." The 
 meaning of the last two distinctions is this : that, when we come to 
 speak very accurately, the conceptions of the ttp6$eclq and irpdyvuciQ, con- 
 tained in the latter statement, are merely the antecedent factors of the 
 true and actual purpose (the TTpooptafxbg)^ which factors, therefore, are not 
 to be connected with the conception of predestination itself, when that 
 is defined as an act or decree. Whence these two factors, viz., the 
 
PREDESTINATION AND ELECTION. 293 
 
 ■7rp6-9eacc and irpdyvumg are also defined as the normative or directive 
 sources from which election proceeds ; the Trpo&eotg being regarded as 
 the primary or mediate normative source, and the irpdyvumc as the imme- 
 diate or proximate source. Quen. (Ill, 18): "The TrpdOeatg is the pri- 
 mary directing principle of election ; yet not immediate, but mediate, 
 for it concurs with the intervening wpdyvuciQ, or the foreseeing for elec- 
 tion of individuals who would to the end, believe in Christ." 
 
 [14] Concerning the relation between predestination and election. 
 Quen. (Ill, 16) : "Election is a synonym of predestination, yet pre- 
 destination and election are not logical synonyms, so as to have the re- 
 lation of genus and species, as the Calvinists state (contending that the 
 divihe predestination as a genus contains, within its bounds, two species, 
 viz., election and reprobation ; or, as others say, it contains two decrees, 
 the one of election, the other of reprobation)." Hutt. (773): " But, 
 according to the tenor of Scripture, they are grammatical synonyms, 
 and of the same breadth. And, although they differ somewhat with re- 
 spect to formal signification, yet materially, and in relation to the sub- 
 ject, they are not distinguished ; whence in Eph. 1 : 4 and 5, both terms, 
 election and predestination, are received in the same sense, nor is there 
 an unlike example given in Scripture." Holl. (605) : "Predestina- 
 tion and election agree with respect to the subject, because no man has 
 been predestined to eternal salvation who has not been elected to the 
 same, nor has any one been elected who has not been predestinated." 
 But "they differ with respect to formal signification; election, accord- 
 ing to its formal notion, relates to the objects which are to be elected ; 
 and predestination, to the end and order of means, which lead to the 
 end of election, or eternal life. For the particle pre, in the word pre- 
 destination, connotes the priority and eternity of the divine ordination ; 
 but the particle e, in the word election, connotes the common aggregate 
 of men, from which there is a separation of some men, and therefore 
 the divine election is the separation of some men from the common mass 
 of corrruption, and their adoption into the inheritance of eternal salva- 
 tion. Predestination (1) presupposes TzpSyvucig, the foreknowledge of 
 certain persons believing to the end, Rom. 8: 29 ; (2) it formally de- 
 notes the ordination to eternal life of those men who, according to the 
 divine foreknowledge, receive and continue to employ the means of 
 grace, Acts 13 : 48. But election (1) presupposes the love of God, 
 Eph. 1:6; (2) it formally denotes the separation, from the common 
 mass of perdition, of those men who he foresees will perseveringly be- 
 lieve in Christ, John 15 : 19." " Another expression for predestination 
 is, according to Phil. 4:3; Rev. 3 : 5, the writing in the book of life." 
 
294 THE DIVINE GOOD WILL. 
 
 [lb'] (a) Full Definition. Holl. (604): "Predestination is an act 
 of the consequent divine will, by which God (moved by gratuitous 
 mercy, because of the merit of Christ, to be apprehended by persever- 
 ing faith), separated from the fallen human race, and ordained to the 
 obtaining eternal salvation for the praise of his glorious grace, those 
 men alone and individually who he foresaw would believe in Christ to 
 the end." 
 
 Quen. (Ill, 19) : "Predestination is an act of the divine will, by 
 which, before the foundations of the earth were laid, not according to 
 our works, but out of pure mercy, according to his purpose and design, 
 which he purposed in himself in consideration of the merit of Christ to 
 be apprehended by faith, God ordained to eternal life for the praise of 
 his glorious grace such men as, by the power of the Holy Ghost, through 
 the preaching of the Gospel, would perseveringly and to the end believe 
 in Christ." 
 
 Quen. (Ill, 14) : " The peculiar and chief foundation of this funda- 
 mental article is Eph. 1 : 4-7." 
 
 (b) The form of election is then thus described by Quen. (Ill, 18) : 
 " It consists in the entire ragig, or order, which God, in ordaining the 
 eternal decree of election, had as his design, and according to which, 
 for the sake of his own mercy, because of the merit of Christ appre- 
 hended by faith, he elects those believing and persevering in faith to 
 the end of life, or, according to which, he fulfils in time the election 
 decreed from eternity." From the fact that election has its ground in 
 the preceding irpdOeatg and npdyvucig, which are related as major and minor 
 premises to the conclusion, viz., the irpoopiafi6c, the syllogism of Predes- 
 tination arises: 
 
 " Every one who will perseveringly believe in Christ to the end of 
 life, will certainly be saved, and, therefore, shall be elected and be writ- 
 ten in the book of life. 
 
 " But Abraham, Peter, Paul, etc., will perseveringly believe in Christ 
 to the end of life. 
 
 " Therefore, Abraham, Peter, Paul, etc., will certainly be saved, and, 
 therefore, shall be elected and be written in the book of life." (Holl. 
 630.) 
 
 (c) The causes of election are then stated thus: "The efficient cause 
 of election : the will of the Triune God, freely decreeing (Rom. 8: 28; 
 Eph. 1: 4; John 13: 18; 15: 16, 19; Acts 13: 2; 2 Thess. 2: 13); 
 the impulsive moving or internal cause : the purely gratuitous grace of 
 God (Rom. 9: 15, 16; Eph. 1: 5; 2: 8, 9; Rom. 11: 5, 6); the 
 moving external cause: the merit of Christ, regarded with respect to 
 
ELECTION WITH RESPECT TO FAITH. 295 
 
 foreseen final application (Eph. 1 : 4-7)." As the external less princi- 
 pal cause, some state, " Faith in Christ, and this final." 
 
 [16] Hutt. (795): " Concerning the question (whether the eternal 
 election of those who are to be saved is to be assigned to the antecedent 
 or the consequent will?), a twofold way presents itself, some turning too 
 much to the right, others too far to the left, and both from the path of 
 truth, although in a diverse mode, relation, and end. For those who 
 follow the side of Calvin affirm that the decree of election should be 
 sought in the antecedent will of God alone, but so, as thence to derive 
 both the absolute and particular will, and indeed also the absolute elec- 
 tion of few men. Huber, on the other hand, likewise placed election in 
 the antecedent will alone ; and, although contending aright, against the 
 Calvinists, that this will is universal, yet erroneously and falsely con- 
 structed thence, against the orthodox, the opinion that election is univer- 
 sal and entirely unlimited. Therefore, just as Calvin removes and elimi- 
 nates from the decree of election all reference to faith, so Huber does 
 the very act of faith. Each of these errors, deviating from the analogy 
 of faith, violates it in this, that it altogether substitutes election for 
 every consideration of righteousness, imputed through faith on account 
 of Christ. In this way, indeed, it is lawful to infer no election at all, 
 rather than either the absolute election of a few, or the universal election 
 of all. For in all Scripture the name of the elect is never ascribed ex- 
 cept to those alone who actually believe and absolutely persevere in faith. 
 In the second place, even the very sound of the terms, election and elect, 
 and their peculiar relation, intimate and prove a distinction or dissimi- 
 larity with respect to men. For the elect are so called in distinction 
 from the non-elect; and yet, in fact, Christian piety and faith forbid us 
 from making any distinction among men in the antecedent will. There- 
 fore, the orthodox Church, making a separation from each of these 
 errors, places election not in the sole and merely simple antecedent will of 
 God, but rather in the consequent will." 
 
 [17] Holl. (633) : "Those elected by God in Christ are wretched 
 sinful men; yet not all promiscuously, but those whom God from eter- 
 nity distinctly foresaw, as those who would believe in Christ to the end." 
 Therefore (619), " The election to eternal life of men corrupted by sin 
 was made by the most merciful God, in consideration of faith in Christ 
 remaining steadfast to the end of life." To guard the expression, in 
 consideration of faith (intuitu fidei) , from misunderstanding, it was still 
 farther observed by Quen. (Ill, 36): "(a) Faith, and that, too, as 
 persevering or final faith, enters into the sphere of eternal election, not 
 as already afforded, but as foreknown. For we are elected to eternal life 
 
296 THE DIVINE GOOD WILL. 
 
 from faith divinely foreseen, apprehending, to the end, the merit of 
 Christ ; (h) Faith enters into election not by reason of any meritorious 
 worth, but with respect to its correlate, or so far as it is the only means 
 of apprehending the merit of Christ ; or, in other words, faith is not a 
 meritorious cause of election, but only a prerequisite condition, or a part 
 of the entire order divinely appointed in election ;" others express them- 
 selves so as to mark faith as the less principal external cause. Concern- 
 ing the different expressions through which the relation of faith to pre- 
 destination is stated, Br. (725): "Some of our theologians, indeed, 
 have said that faith in Christ is the instrumental cause of the decree of 
 election ; others, that it is its condition ; some that it is the condition on 
 the part of the object of election ; others that it is a part of the order of 
 predestination ; but in the same sense with each other, and with those 
 who call it the impulsive less principal cause. For all acknowledge 
 that faith is not a mere condition which exercises no causality ; but, as 
 it is constituted for the act of saving, so is it for the act of decreeing 
 salvation (virtually causing salvation), as that in consideration of which 
 we have been elected, and yet as a principal cause, of itself able to in- 
 fluence God to elect us. Whence, when faith is otherwise regarded un- 
 der the figure of a*hand or organ, by which, as a cause of salvation, the 
 grace of God electing, and the merit of Christ are apprehended, and, in 
 this manner, is usually called an instrument ; yet here the relation of 
 faith to the decree of election itself must be shown : where our theolo- 
 gians do not say that it is of the manner of an instrument, which the 
 efficient principal cause, God, in electing, employs to produce the act of 
 election by a real influx. Bnt those who have spoken of an instrumen- 
 tal moral cause cannot understand anything else than an impulsive less 
 principal cause. . . . Therefore, then, this formula of speaking remains, 
 by which faith is called the impulsive cause or reason, yet not the chief 
 or principal ; but with the addition, for the sake of avoiding ambiguity, 
 of less principal." [Baier commends the following from Meissner : 
 " It seems more fitting that* faith be considered not separately as a pecu- 
 liar cause of election, distinct from the merit of Christ, but joined with 
 that merit as apprehended, so as to render both united the one impelling 
 cause of election. For neither does faith merit without the application, 
 nor does it itself move God to elect, but both combined in the divine 
 foreknowledge, i. e., the merit apprehended by faith, or faith apprehend- 
 ing the merit ."] 
 
 Concerning the relation of prescience and predestination, Hutt. 
 (Loc. c, 803): " I. The word Prescience is received in this place, not 
 in a general, indefinite, and loose sense, concerning the knowledge of all 
 
BASED UPON FOREKNOWLEDGE. 297 
 
 future things ; in this sense the prescience of bad things, as well as of 
 good, belongs to God, and presupposes, at the same time, predestination. 
 But restrictedly and determinatively to a certain matter and subject, 
 namely, to prescience of faith in Christ, which is peculiar to the elect. 
 This determinative distinguishing of prescience always presupposes pre- 
 destination, according to Rom. 8 : 29, whom he foreknew, viz., according 
 to the interpretation of Augustine, those who would believe in his Son, 
 he also did predestinate ; and he indeed predestinated them to be con- 
 formed to the image of his Son. For in this passage the Apostle does 
 not treat of the antecedent will of God, by reason of which he wishes all 
 men to be conformed to the image of his Son, but he treats of those who 
 already, in the very decree of God, are conformed to this image. II. 
 This prescience is not the predestination itself of God, or the decree of 
 election, as Calvin affirms. . . . For the Apostle, in the words just 
 cited, expressly considers prescience and predestination as two dis- 
 tinct things; saying, whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate; 
 otherwise, a most senseless notion, such as this, would appear : ' Whom 
 he predestinated, he predestinated.' . . . Therefore, it is decided 
 aright that the word prescience in this passage denotes, according to the 
 Hebrew idiom, not the simple knowledge of God, but that which is 
 joined with approbation and delight, because determined to an object 
 pleasing to God, viz., to Christ apprehended by faith, or, what amounts 
 to the same thing, to faith apprehending the merit of Christ. III. This 
 prescience, which we have said enters into the decree of election, is not 
 regarded as a cause, on account of, or because of which, election takes 
 place, or salvation itself is conferred upon the elect ; because it is not an 
 essential part, constituting election itself, but is added to predestination 
 only as an adjunct, and that, too, inseparable. For although prescience, 
 since it is placed in a lower grade, can be sometimes unaccompanied by 
 predestination, as happens in regard to the sins and wicked actions of 
 men, yet with predestination determined, because of a higher grade, it 
 is necessary that the lower should always be included. Hence the Apostle 
 says : ' The foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, " The Lord 
 knoweth them that are his,'" 2 Tim. 2 :19. Moreover, he knew this 
 not only in time, but foreknew it from all eternity. This knowledge or 
 foreknowledge is therefore an eye, as it were, of the eternal election ; 
 ,for he who would destroy this would render our election blind and de- 
 stroy it." 
 
 [18] Holl. (631); " The decree is relative, because when God pre- 
 destinated certain fallen men to eternal life, and, indeed, some rather 
 than others, he regarded something outside of himself as an impulsive 
 20 
 
298 THE DIVINE GOOD WILL. 
 
 external cause, viz., the merit of Christ, to be apprehended by persever- 
 ing faith." 
 
 Quen. (Ill, 31) : " Predestination to eternal life is not absolute, but 
 is founded upon Christ as mediator. The antithesis of the Calvinists, 
 who exclude the merit of Christ from the causes of election, and refer 
 to means of accomplishing it furnished in time, and, therefore, deny 
 that Christ is the meritorious cause of our election." The doctrine of 
 Calvin is accordingly distinguished from that of the Lutheran Church, 
 in that, according to the former, predestination rests upon an absolute 
 decree of God (" by which God absolutely of himself, without a prere- 
 quisite condition or without outward respect to any other cause or inter- 
 vening reason, wills and does something, according to the manner in 
 which he absolutely willed to create and preserve it." Quen.) ; and 
 hence, likewise, it is not the earnestly intended will of God that all men 
 should be saved unto whom the Gospel is preached, and, accordingly, a 
 distinction is made between the manifest will or that of the sign, and the 
 secret will or that of the purpose. 
 
 [19] Holl. (631): "God indeed decreed absolutely and uncondi- 
 tionally to save this or that one, because he certainly foresaw his perse- 
 vering faith in Christ." If it be asserted of the decree that it is not 
 conditioned, it appears to contradict the former assertion that it is not 
 absolute. Holl. (632) explains the apparent contradiction by the fol- 
 lowing : " When the decree of predestination is said to be not absolute, 
 it must not be regarded on that account conditional. For the idea is 
 not, that God from eternity would elect this or that one to salvation, if 
 he would believe in Christ, and depart hence in the true faith, but be- 
 cause he would believe and would persevere ; so that faith regarded in 
 the will of God, before the act of predestination, is indeed a condition, 
 under which he desires the salvation of all ; yet in the decree itself it is 
 not a condition under which the election was made, but a reason by 
 which God was moved to elect. Therefore, the decree should not be 
 denied to be absolute, when considered with respect to that which is 
 conditional ; yet not in such a manner as to exclude the consideration of 
 the a priori reason outside of God, as a part in the order of predestina- 
 tion, which is, without doubt, faith in Christ foreseen from eternity, or, 
 what amounts to the same thing, the merit of Christ, apprehended by 
 faith. For the decree must not be confounded with the antecedent will 
 of God, which, we affirm, from the Word of God, does not exclude a 
 condition, but appoints it, Rom. 11 : 23." 
 
 [20] Quen. (Ill, 21): "Through mortal sins the elect may alto- 
 gether lose and banish the Holy Ghost, faith and the grace of God, 
 
REPROBATION. 299 
 
 and thus for a time become subjects of condemnation, yet they cannot 
 be wanting to the end, and perish eternally. Total loss of grace is one 
 thing, final loss of grace is another. That is total, by which any one is 
 entirely deprived of the grace of God ; that is Jlnal, by which any one, 
 shortly before death, departs from the faith, and dies in unbelief." 
 
 [21] Holl. (642) : "A regenerate man in the midst of the course 
 of his life is certain of his election conditionally (Phil. 2 : 12), but, at 
 the end of life, the same rejoices in the absolute certainty of his predes- 
 tination." 
 
 [22] Holl. (644) : " The word reprobation (airodoKi/uaaia) is not found 
 in just so many syllables in Holy Scripture. The word addia/iog is used, 
 1 Cor. 9 : 27 ; 2 Cor. 13:5; Heb. 6 : 8." Quen. (Ill, 21) : " It is 
 otherwise called irpoypa^ elg to Kpifia, Jude 4." 
 
 [23] Brchm.: '* When the case of reprobation is considered there is 
 need of pious caution. We must avoid considering God the cause of 
 reprobation in the same manner that he is of election. For he is the 
 cause of election, both with regard to his effecting it and with regard to 
 the end, both with regard to the decrees and to all the means leading to 
 the end. But the matter is different in reprobation. For, since repro- 
 bation is eternal perdition, to which there is no direct way except 
 through sin, and especially unbelief; every one must see that reproba- 
 tion cannot be ascribed to God as effecting it, inasmuch as it is either 
 damnation itself or sin, the means leading thither. The true cause of 
 reprobation is in man himself, and is undoubtedly the obstinate contempt 
 of the grace offered in the Gospel. . . . God, meanwhile, is not the in- 
 different witness of reprobation, but, as the just avenger of crimes and 
 of despised grace, is occupied with certain special acts concerning the 
 wicked and unbelieving, who, although they have been for a long time 
 admonished, invited, and punished, yet out of pure malice have con- 
 tinued to despise and resist the Gospel." 
 
300 THE FRATERNAL REDEMPTION. 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 Of the Fraternal Redemption by Christ, as the Second 
 Source of Salvation. 
 
 § 31. Statement of the Subject. 
 
 r I ^HE redemption designed by God from eternity was accom- 
 -*- plished in time by bis only begotten Son, Jesus Christ, [1] 
 and of this we are now to treat. The subject will be discussed 
 under three heads: I. The Person of the Redeemer. II. The 
 Work by which he accomplished Redemption. III. The sev- 
 eral States in which he appeared from the time of his incarnation. 
 
 [1] Holl. (650): " The Redeemer of the human race is Jesus Christ. 
 The Redeemer is called Jesus, i. e., Saviour, because he was to save his 
 people from their sins, Matt. 1 ; 21," (655) :." He is called Christ, i. e., 
 anointed, because he was anointed by the Holy Ghost as our king, 
 priest, and prophet, John 1 : 41." The Dogmaticians prove that Jesus 
 Christ is the true Messiah, in whom all the prophecies of the Old Tes- 
 tament concerning the Messiah are exactly fulfilled. Holl. (675): 
 " Proof. (1) Whoever is God and man is the true Messiah. But 
 Jesus, etc. The major premise is evident from 2 Sam. 7: 12, 13 ; Ps. 
 110:1 ; Micah 5:1; Jer. 23:5 . . . (2) Whoever was born of the 
 seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Judah, of the royal branch of David, 
 and of a pure virgin, is the true Messiah. The major premise, from 
 Gen. 22 : 18 ; 49 : 10 ; 2 Sam. 7 : 12 ; Is. 7 : 14. The minor, from Luke 
 3 : 23 ; 1 : 34. (3) Whatever ruler of Israel, as God, was begotten 
 from eternity, and as man was born in the fulness of time at Bethlehem, 
 is the true Messiah. The major premise, from Micah 5 : 2. The minor, 
 from Matt. 2:6.. . . (4) He is the true Messiah, for whose approach 
 a divinely appointed herald prepared the way. The major, from Is. 
 40 : 3 ; Mai. 3 : 1. The minor, from Mark 1 : 2, 3. . . . (5) Whatever 
 king of Zion entered Jerusalem poor and humble, riding upon an ass, 
 is the true Messiah, Zach. 9:9. . . . (6) Whoever is the Goel or Re- 
 deemer according to the law of consanguinity, Job 19 : 25; the prophet 
 like Moses. Deut. 18 : 15 ; a universal king, Zach. 9:9; Ps. 72 : 8 ; a 
 priest according to the order of Melchizedek, Ps. 110 : 4 ; a priest inter- 
 ceding for sinners, Is. 53 : 12 ; who is to pass through the extremity of 
 
THE TWO NATURES IN CHRIST. 301 
 
 suffering, Ps. 22 ; Is. 53 ; who is to die, Dan. 9 ; 26 ; who is to be buried, 
 Is. 53 : 9 ; who is to be free from corruption, to descend to the dead and 
 to rise again, Ps. 16 : 10 ; to ascend to heaven, Ps. 68 : 18 ; to sit at the 
 right hand of God the Father, Ps. 110:1; is the promised Messiah. 
 All these things the New Testament declares of Jesus of Nazareth." 
 
 A OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST. 
 
 § 32. Of the Personal Union. 
 
 In Christ the Redeemer we recognize a duality of natures and 
 a unity of person, as expressed in the statement : " In Christ, 
 horn of the Virgin Mary, are two natures, a divine, that of the 
 Word (o 16-yog), and a human nature, so united that Christ is one 
 person" (Chmn., Loc. Th., I, 75.) We are to treat, therefore, 
 in succession, first, of the two natures in Christ, and secondly, of 
 the person of Christ. 
 
 I. Of the Two Natures in Christ. — Christ is God and man. 
 This is otherwise thus expressed : He exists in two natures, the 
 divine and the human. [1] The divine nature he has of God the 
 Father, and from eternity ; the human nature he assumed in 
 time from the Virgin Mary. [2] Each of these natures is to be 
 regarded as truly genuine and entire, [3] for Christ is true God 
 and true man. [4] As true man he participates in all the natural 
 weaknesses to which human nature is subject since the fall; he 
 participates therein, however, not in consequence of a natural 
 necessity, but in consequence of his own free will, for the accom- 
 plishment of his mediatorial work ; for, as he was born of a 
 human being, the Virgin Mary, but not begotten of a human 
 father, his human nature did not inherit any of the consequences 
 of Adam's sin. [5] This does not prevent us from ascribing to 
 Christ a true, complete human nature, like our own, as this is, 
 indeed, predicated of Adam when not yet fallen, inasmuch as 
 original sin that we have inherited in consequence of the sin of 
 Adam has not given man another nature ; it does, however, fol- 
 low from the peculiar circumstances connected with the birth of 
 Christ, and from the peculiar relation which the divine Myog sus- 
 tains to this human nature, that certain peculiarities must be 
 predicated of the human nature of Christ which distinguish it 
 
302 THE FRATERNAL REDEMPTION. 
 
 from that of other men. These are (1) the awmooraoia [i. e., want 
 of personality] ; (2) the avafiaprrjaia \i. e., sinlessness] ; (3) the sin- 
 gulars animse et corporis excellentia [i. e., the peculiar excellence 
 of soul and body.] [6] The first results from the peculiar rela- 
 tion which the divine Myog- entered into with the human nature; 
 for this latter is not to be regarded as at any time subsisting by 
 itself and constituting a person by itself, for the Myo? did not as- 
 sume a human person, but only a human nature. Therefore 
 there is negatively predicated of the human nature the awnooTaoia, 
 inasmuch as the human nature has no personality of its own ; 
 and there is positive]y predicated of it the kwirooraaia, inasmuch 
 as this human nature has become possessed of another hypostasis, 
 that of the divine -nature. The hvafiaprrjaia (sinlessness) is ex- 
 pressly taught in many passages of the Scriptures (2 Cor. 5:21; 
 Heb. 7: 26; Is. 53: 9; Dan. 9: 24; Luke 1: 35; 1 Peter 1: 19; 
 2 : 22), and follows also from the supernatural birth of Christ. 
 And the singular excellency of soul and body is a consequence 
 of his sinlessness. 
 
 II. Of the Person of Christ. — The person of the Eedeemer is 
 constituted, when the Myog, the second person of the Godhead, the 
 Son of God, unites himself with human nature, and this so firmly 
 and intimately that the two natures now united constitute one per- 
 son, which is that of the Eedeemer, the God-man. [7] The act itself 
 by which this is accomplished is called unitio personalis. Holl. 
 (665): "The divine action by which the Son of God assumed 
 human nature, in the womb of the Virgin Mary, into the unity 
 of his own person." [8] This act is chosen and determined upon 
 by the entire holy Trinity, by whom the substance that consti- 
 tutes the human nature is prepared, and by whom this is united 
 with the divine nature; but this act is accomplished in the second 
 person of the Godhead, who alone has become man. [9] This 
 second person of the Godhead, the Myog, in the act of uniting 
 holds such a relation to the human nature that he, the Xoyog, im- 
 parts the personality, [10] and is in general the efficient agent 
 through which the union is accomplished; for it is he that sus- 
 tains an active relation to the human nature, which he assumes, 
 whilst the human nature stands in a passive relation to him. [11] 
 This firm union of the divine and human nature, regarded as a 
 
THE PERSON OF CHRIST. 303 
 
 condition, is then called unio 'personalis seu hypostatica [i. e., per- 
 sonal' or hypostatic union]. Holl. (679): "The personal union 
 is a conjunction of the two natures, divine and human, subsisting 
 in one hypostasis of the Son of God, producing a mutual and an 
 indissoluble communion of both natures." [12] And the result of 
 this activity of the loyog is, that the hypostasis of the divine nature 
 now has become also the hypostasis of the human nature, i. e., both 
 natures have now one hypostasis, that of the My g, and together form 
 one person, that of the Eedeemer, the God- man. [13] In conse- 
 quence thereof the union of the two natures is so close and in- 
 separable [14] that the one can no longer be conceived of as 
 without or away from the other, but both are to be regarded as 
 in all respects united, [15] yet in such a way that each of the two 
 natures in this union retains its own essential character and pecu- 
 liarities as before,' and remains unmingled with the other. [16] 
 So the Scriptures teach. But it is impossible to form a correct 
 conception of the way and manner in which these two natures 
 are united in the one person, because the Scriptures teach us only 
 the union itself, and not the mode in which it is effected. We 
 shall have to content ourselves, therefore, with guarding against 
 false conceptions that might be entertained in regard to this 
 union. [17] Accordingly we say that the union is not " (1) an 
 essential one, by which two natures coalesce in one essence 
 (against the Eutychians); (2) not a natural one, such as that of 
 the soul and body in man ; (3) not an accidental one, such as (a) 
 between two or more different qualities united in one subject (as 
 whiteness and sweetness are united in milk); (b) between a qual- 
 ity and a substance (as we find in a learned man) ; (c) between 
 two substances that are accidentally united (as between beams 
 that happen to be fastened together); (4) not a merely verbal one, 
 arising either from a sinecure title (as when a man is called a 
 counsellor of his sovereign, which title was never bestowed upon 
 him because of counsels he had given), or from the use of figura- 
 sive language (as when Herod is called a fox) ; finally, (5) not an 
 habitual or relative one, which may exist, although the parties to 
 this union may be separated and far apart. (There are many 
 varieties of this relative union, such as moral, between friends ; 
 domestic, between husband and wife; political, between citizens; 
 
804 THE PERSON OF CHRIST. 
 
 ecclesiastical, between members of the Church.)" [18] Holl. 
 (679). On the other hand, we may predicate of this union, posi- 
 tively, that 
 
 " (1) It is true and real, because it exists between extremes 
 that really adhere, there being no separation or distance between 
 them; 
 
 "(2) It is a personal one (but not a union of persons), and in- 
 terpenetrative (perichoristica) ;* 
 
 " (3) It is a perpetually enduring one." (See Notes 6, 7, 8.) 
 
 [1] Hfrffr. (260): "By the natures, the two sources or parts, so to 
 speak, are understood, of which the person of Christ has been consti- 
 tuted, namely, a Divine nature and a human nature." Of person it is 
 remarked : " The person of our Redeemer is here considered, not as 
 aaapKog, or such as it was from eternity before the incarnation, but as 
 evoapKo?, or such as it began to be in the fulness of time, through the 
 taking of our human nature into his own divine person." (Holl., 
 656.) 
 
 General Definition of Nature and Person. Chmn. (de duab. nat., 1): 
 14 Essence, or substance, or nature, is that which of itself is common to 
 many individuals of the same species, and which embraces the entire 
 essential perfection of each of them." 
 
 " Person or individual is something peculiar, possessing indeed the 
 entire and perfect substance of the same species, but determined and 
 limited by a characteristic and personal peculiarity, and thus subsists of 
 itself, separated or distinguished from the other individuals of the same 
 species, not in essence, but in number. For a person is an indivisible, 
 intelligent, incommunicable substance, which neither is a part of another, 
 nor is sustained in another, nor has dependence upon another object 
 such as the separated soul has upon the body that is to be raised up. 
 Therefore, the names of the essence or natures are dedrrjg, avdpidiroTrje, 
 divinity, humanity, divine nature, human nature, divine essence, human 
 substance. The designations of the person are God, man." 
 
 Concerning the difference of signification, in which the term nature 
 or essence is employed with reference to God and to man, cf. chapter, 
 "Of the Holy Trinity," note 13, p. 150. 
 
 Quen. {Of the Divine Nature of Christ (III, 75) ) : "The divine 
 nature otherwise signifies the divine essence, one in number, common 
 to all three persons, and entire in each ; but, in the article ' Of the 
 
 * Perichoristica. See 3 33, Note 2. 
 
THE TWO NATURES IN CHRIST. 305 
 
 Person of Christ,' this is not considered absolutely, in so far as it is 
 common to the three persons of the Godhead, but relatively, so far as 
 it subsists in the person of the Son of God, and, as by the manner of its 
 existence, it is limited to the second person of the Trinity. Whence it 
 is true that the entire divine essence is united to human nature, but 
 only in one of its persons, viz., the second." 
 
 [2] Quen. (Ill, 75) : "The incarnate person consists of two natures, 
 divine and human. The divine nature he possesses from eternity, from 
 God the Father, through eternal, true, and properly named generation 
 of substance, whence Christ is also the true, natural, and eternal God, 
 and Son of God. A true and pure human nature he received in time, 
 of the Virgin Mary." 
 
 A twofold generation is, therefore, distinguished in Christ: one "an 
 eternal generation, through which he is the Son of God;" and another, 
 " a generation in time, through which he is man, or the Son of man. 
 Gal. 4: 4." (Br., 457.) 
 
 [3] Holl. (659): "The Council of Chalcedon: 'We confess that 
 he is true God and true man, the latter consisting of a reasonable soul 
 and a body, coessential with the Father according to the Godhead, and 
 coessential with us according to the manhood, in all things like unto 
 us, sin only excepted.' " 
 
 Schrzr. (177) : " The antithesis of the Eutychians, who indeed ad- 
 mit two natures prior to the act of union, but affirm that from that time 
 the human nature has been altogether absorbed by the Godhead." 
 
 Quen. (Ill, 75) : "With regard to the human nature we must con- 
 sider: 1, its truth; 2, its completeness; 3, its Sfioovala (identity of 
 essence). The first excludes a mere appearance ; the second, incom- 
 pleteness ; the third, hepovaia (contrariety of essence)." 
 
 Grh. (Ill, 373) : "In Christ there is a true and perfect divine nature, 
 and hence Christ is also true, natural, and eternal God. We say that 
 in Christ there are not only divine gifts, but also a true and perfect di- 
 vine nature; nor do we simply say that he is and is called God, but 
 that he is true, natural, and eternal God, in order, by this means, to 
 separate our confession the more distinctly from the blasphemies of the 
 Photinians, and all deo^&xoc (opponents of the divine nature)." 
 
 (Id. Ill, 400): "In Christ there is a true, complete, and perfect 
 human nature, and for this reason Christ is also true, perfect, and nat- 
 ural man. By truth of human nature is meant that the Word took upon 
 himself not an appearance, or mere outward form of human nature, but 
 in reality became a man. By completeness of human nature is meant 
 that he took, into the unity of his person, all the essential parts of 
 
306 THE PERSON OF CHRIST. 
 
 human nature, not only a body, but also a rational soul ; since his flesh 
 was flesh pervaded by soul. Nor is it said only that he was, but that 
 he still is, a man : because he never has laid aside, nor ever will lay 
 aside, what he has once assumed." These expressions are directed 
 against the Monotheletes, " who acknowledged a human mind in Christ, 
 but denied to Christ a human will." (Brchm.) 
 
 [4] Holl. (656) : " 1. The true and eternal divine nature is proved 
 by the most complete arguments, derived («) from the divine names 
 (arg. bvo/LtaoTinoig) ; (b) from the attributes peculiar to the true God alone 
 (arg. IScujuaTiKocg) ; (c) from the personal and essential acts of God 
 (arg. kvepyrjTiKoig) ; (d) from the religious worship due God alone (arg. 
 larpevTLKoig) ;" cf. chapter on the Trinity, note 33. 
 
 " II. That Christ is true man, is shown (a) from human names (John 
 8 : 40 ; 1 Tim. 2:5); (b) from the essential parts of a man (John 2 : 
 21; Heb. 2: 14; Luke 24: 39; John 10: 15; Matt. 26: 38; Luke 
 2 ; 52 ; John 5:21; Matt. 26 : 39) ; (c) from the attributes peculiar 
 to a true man (Matt. 4:2; John 19 : 28 ; Matt. 25 : 37 ; Luke 19 : 
 41 ; John 11 : 33) ; (d) from human works (Luke 2 : 46, 48 ; Matt. 
 4 : 1 ; 26 : 55) ; (e) from the genealogy of Christ as a man (in the as- 
 cending line, Luke 3 : 23 ; in the descending line, Matt. 1 : 1)." 
 
 [5] Chmn. (de duab. nat., 11) : ... " Christ, conceived of the 
 Holy Ghost, took upon himself a human nature without sin, pure. 
 Therefore the infirmities, which as punishments accompany sin, would 
 not have been in the flesh of Christ by necessity of the condition, but 
 his body could have been kept clear and exempt from these infirmities. 
 Sinful flesh was not necessary to his being true man, as Adam, before 
 the fall, without the infirmities which are punishments, was true man. 
 But for our sakes, and for our salvation, the incarnate Christ, to com- 
 mend his love to us, willingly took upon himself these infirmities, that 
 thus he might bear the punishment transferred from us to himself, and 
 might free us from it." Hutt. (1. c, 125) : " That he took upon him- 
 self these, not so far as they have reference to any guilt, but only as 
 they have the condition of punishment ; neither, indeed, these individ- 
 ually and collectively, but only such as the work of Redemption ren- 
 dered it necessary for him to take upon himself, and which detract 
 nothing from the dignity of his nature." But a distinction is made be- 
 tween natural and personal infirmities. 
 
 Holl. (657).: " The natural infirmities common to men are those 
 which, since the fall, exist in all men, e. g., to hunger, to thirst, to be 
 wearied, to suffer cold and heat, to be grieved, to be angry, to be troubled, 
 to weep. Since they are without guilt, Christ, according to the testi- 
 
307 
 
 mony of Holy Scripture, took them upon himself, not by constraint, but 
 freely ; not for his own sake, but for our sake," (Quen. (Ill, 76), 
 "that he might perform the work of a mediator, and become a victim 
 for our sins,") "not forever, but for a time, namely, in the state of hu- 
 miliation, and not retaining the same in the state of exaltation. . . . 
 Personal infirmities are those which proceed from particular causes, and 
 derive their origin either from an imperfection of formative power in the 
 one begetting, as consumption, gout ; or from a particular crime, as in- 
 temperance in eating and drinking, such as fever, dropsy, etc.; or from 
 a special divine judgment, as the diseases of the family of Job (2 Sam. 
 3 : 29). These are altogether remote from the most holy humanity of 
 Christ, because to have assumed these would not have been of advantage 
 to the human race, and would have detracted from human dignity. ,, 
 
 [6] Hole. (657) : " To the human nature of Christ there belong cer- 
 tain individual designations, by which, as by certain distinctive charac- 
 teristics or prerogatives, he excels other men ; such are [a) aw-noaraaia, 
 the being without a peculiar subsistence, since this is replaced by the 
 divine person (vttoctciglq) of the Son of God, as one far more exalted. 
 If the human nature of Christ had retained its peculiar subsistence, 
 there would have been in Christ two persons, and therefore two media- 
 tors, contrary to 1. Tim. 2: o. The reason is, because a person is form- 
 ally constituted in its being by a subsistence altogether complete, and 
 therefore unity of person is to be determined from unity of subsistence. 
 Therefore, one or the other nature, of those which unite in one person, 
 must be without its own peculiar subsistence ; and, since the divine na- 
 ture, which is really the same as its subsistence, cannot really be with- 
 out the same, it is evident that the absence of a peculiar subsistence 
 must be ascribed to the human nature." Still, a distinction must be 
 made between hvvnoaraaia and evviroaraala. QuEN. (Ill, 77) : " That is 
 avvwoararov which does not subsist of itself and according to its peculiar 
 personality ; but that is kvvK6ararov which subsists in another, and be- 
 comes the partaker of the hypostasis of another. When, therefore, the 
 human nature of Christ is said to be awKba-aroq^ nothing else is meant 
 than that, it does not subsist of itself, and according to itself, in a pecu- 
 liar personality ; moreover, it is called kvv7r6araTog, because it has become 
 a partaker of the hypostasis of another, and subsists in the Xojog." 
 
 Holl. (658) considers the following objections: "You say, 'If the 
 human nature is without a peculiar subsistence, the same will be more 
 imperfect than our nature, which is avQvTc6araroq, or subsisting of itself.' 
 Reply: 'The perfection of an object is to be determined from its es- 
 sence, and not from its subsistence.' " The observation of Grh. (Ill, 
 
308 THE PERSON OF CHRIST. 
 
 421) is also of importance: [" 'Awirdararov has a twofold meaning. Ab- 
 solutely, that is said to be 'awir, which subsists neither in its own 
 vTToordmg, nor in that of another, which has neither essence nor subsist- 
 ence, is neither in itself, nor in another, but is purely negative. In this 
 sense, the human nature of Christ cannot be said to be awiroaraTov. Re- 
 latively, that is said to be avviroararov, which does not subsist in its own, 
 but in the vTcoaraaiq of another, which indeed has essence, but not per- 
 sonality and subsistence peculiar to itself. In this sense, the flesh of 
 Christ is said to be awKoararoq, because it is kvuTroararog, subsisting in the 
 AJyof."] " The statement of some that the starting-point of the incarna- 
 tion is the awTToaraaia of the flesh intervening between that subsistence, 
 on the one hand, by which the mass whereof the body of Christ was 
 formed subsisted as a part of the virgin, not by its own subsistence and 
 that of the virgin; and the subsistence, on the other hand, whereby the 
 human nature, formed from the sanctified mass by the operation of the 
 Holy Ghost in the first moment of incarnation, began to subsist with 
 the very subsistence of the 16yog, communicated to it, is not to be re- 
 ceived in such a sense as though the flesh of Christ ivas at any time en- 
 tirely awiroararog ] but, because in our thought, such an avviroaraaia is re- 
 garded prior to its reception into the subsistence of the loyog, not with 
 regard to the order of time, but to that of nature. The flesh and soul 
 were not first united into one person ; but the formation of the flesh, by 
 the Holy Ghost, from the separated and sanctified mass, the giving of a 
 soul to this flesh as formed, the taking up of the formed and animated 
 flesh into the subsistence of the \6yoq, and the conception of the formed, 
 animated, and subsisting flesh in the womb of the virgin, were simultan- 
 eous" 
 
 (b) avafiapTTjala. Chemn. (de duab. nat., 13, 14): "For this reason 
 Gabriel says to Mary, * The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the 
 power of the Highest shall overshadow thee, so that what shall be born 
 of thee will be holy.' Therefore, the working of the Holy Ghost caused 
 the virgin Mary without male seed to conceive and be with child. And 
 the Holy Ghost so sanctified and cleansed, from every spot of sin, the 
 mass which the Son of God, in the conception, assumed from the flesh 
 and blood of Mary, that that which is born of Mary was holy, Is. 53 : 
 9 ; Dan. 9 : 24; Luke 1 : 35 ; 2 Cor. 5 : 21 ; Heb. 7:26; 1 Pet. 1:19; 
 2: 22." (Quen. (Ill, 77): "I say inherent, not imputative sinless- 
 ness ; for our sins were really imputed to him, and he was made sin for 
 us, 2 Cor. 5 : 21.") 
 
 Schrzr. (189) : " Christ never sinned, nor was he even able to sin. 
 We prove the statement that he was not even able to sin, or that he was 
 
ATTRIBUTES OF CHRIST'S HUMAN NATURE. 309 
 
 impeccable, as follows : (a) He who is like men, sin only excepted, 
 cannot be peccable. For, since all men are peccable, Christ would be 
 like them also with regard to sin and peccability, which contradicts the 
 apostle, Heb. 7 : 26. (;?) He who is both holy by his origin, and is ex- 
 empt from original sin, who can never have a depraved will, and con- 
 stitutes one person with God himself, is clearly impeccable, (y) He 
 who is higher than the angels is altogether impeccable. (6) He to 
 whom the Holy Ghost has been given without measure, is also holy and 
 just without measure, and therefore cannot sin." 
 
 (c) An eminent excellence of soul and body. Quen. (Ill, 78): "A 
 threefold perfection of soul, viz., of intellect, will, and desire." (Holl. 
 (658) : "The soul of Christ contains excellences of wisdom, Luke 2: 
 47; John 7: 46, and of holiness.") "The perfection of body: (a) 
 The highest evupaaia, a healthful and uniform temperament of body. (/?) 
 adavacia, or immortality" (Holl. (ib.) "which belongs to him, both be- 
 cause of the soundness of an impeccable nature, Rom. 6: 23, and the 
 indissoluble bond of the personal union. Christ, therefore, is immortal, 
 by reason of intrinsic principle, and the fact that he died arose from an 
 extrinsic principle, and according to a voluntary arrangement (bcKovofiia) , 
 John 10 : 17, 18. Yet in the death which was voluntarily submitted to, 
 the body of Christ remained acpdaprov, or exempt from corruption, Ps. 
 16: 10 ; Acts 2 : 31.") ( y) "The greatest elegance and beauty of 
 form, Ps. 45 : 2." (Holl. (ib.) : " The beauty of Christ's body is in- 
 ferred from the excellence of the soul inhabiting it, . . . and from the 
 immediate operation of the Holy Ghost, by whose efficacious presence 
 (eTrehevoig) the most glorious temple of Christ's body was formed." 
 Quex. (Ill, 78) : " The passage, ' He was despised and rejected of 
 men,' Is. 53 : 3, refers to the deformity arising from the wounds of the 
 passion.") 
 
 (7] Chemn. (de duab. nat., 18) : " It is not sufficient to know and to 
 believe that in Christ there are, in some way or other, two natures, 
 divine and human, but we must add to this that, in the hypostatic union, 
 they are so closely joined, that there is one and the same subsistence 
 consisting of these two natures, and subsisting in two natures." 
 
 Holl. (668): " The divine and human natures existing in the one 
 united person of the Son of God have one and the same hypostasis, yet 
 have it in a diverse mode. For the divine nature has this primarily, of 
 itself and independently ; but the human nature has this secondarily, 
 because of the personal union, and therefore by partaking of it from 
 another (Lat. participative)." 
 
 [8] Br. (461) : " The union of the human nature with the divine 
 
310 PERSON OF CHRIST. 
 
 consists in this, that the natures are so joined that they become one per- 
 son." Expressions of like import are: capKuaiq, evcaptaoaic, capnoyewTjcia, 
 incarnation, becoming man, becoming body (incorporation evavdp&Trqoig 
 and hao/uaTOGic;} , assumption (irpdaTirj-ipig). 
 
 Quen. (Ill, 80) : " The basis of this mystery is found in John 1:14; 
 Gal. 4: 4; 1 Tim. 3: 16; Heb. 2: 14, 16; Rom. 9:5." 
 
 Definition — Holl. (665): "The incarnation is a divine act, by 
 which the Son of God, in the womb of his mother, the Virgin Mary, 
 took into the unity of his person a human nature, consubstantial with 
 us, but without sin, and destitute of a subsistence of its own, and com- 
 municated to the same both his divine person and nature, so that Christ 
 now subsists forever, as the God-man, in two natures, divine and human, 
 most intimately united." 
 
 [9] Grh. Ill, 413 : " The question is asked, * How is the work of 
 incarnation ascribed to the Father and Holy Ghost, so that, neverthe- 
 less, the Son alone is said to be incarnate?' We distinguish (1) be- 
 tween the sanctification of the mass whereof the body of Christ was 
 formed, which cleansed it from every stain of sin, and (2) the formation 
 of the body of Christ from that sanctified mass by divine power, which 
 twofold action is common to the entire Trinity, and (3) between the as- 
 sumption of that body into the person of the loyog, which is peculiar to the 
 Son of God. Whence the work of incarnation, so far as the act is con- 
 cerned, is said to be common to the entire Trinity; but, so far as the end 
 of the assumed flesh, which is the person of the Xoyog, is concerned, it is 
 peculiar to the Son ; so far as the effecting or production of the act is 
 concerned, it is said to be a work ad extra and essential, or common to 
 the entire Trinity. So far as its termination or relation is concerned, 
 it is a work ad intra and personal, or peculiar to the Son.* The act 
 of assumption proceeds from the divine virtue common to the three 
 persons ; the end of the assumption is the person peculiar to the Son. 
 The Father sent the Son into the world. The Holy Ghost, coming 
 upon the drops of blood from which the body of Christ was formed, 
 sanctified and cleansed them from all sin, in order that that which would 
 be born of Mary should be holy, and by divine power so wrought in the 
 blessed Virgin that, contrary to the order of nature, she conceived off- 
 spring without male seed. The Son descended from heaven, over- 
 shadowed the virgin, came into flesh, and became flesh by partaking of 
 the same, by manifesting himself in the same, and by taking it into the 
 unity of his person." (In Luke 1 : 35, " The power of the Highest 
 
 * Compare chapter on the Trinity, note 22. 
 
MODE OF INCARNATION. 311 
 
 shall overshadow thee," is generally understood as referring to the 
 Son.) Holl. (G61): "Overshadowing denotes the mysterious and 
 wonderful filling of the temple of the body, formed by the Holy Ghost. 
 For, indeed, the Son of God overshadowed the Virgin Mary, while he 
 descended in an inscrutable manner into the womb of the Virgin, and 
 by a peculiar assimilation filled and united to himself a particle of the 
 Virgin's blood excited by the Holy Spirit, so that he dwelt in it bodily, 
 as in his own temple." (Id. 661 and 662): " The conception of the 
 God-man is referred to the Holy Ghost, Luke 1 : 35 ; (a) because the 
 entire work of fructifying is ascribed to him, Gen. 1:2; (b) in order 
 that the purity of the particle of blood, from which the flesh of Christ 
 grew, might be the more evident ; (c) that thus the cause of the gen- 
 eration of Christ as a man, and of our regeneration, might be the same, 
 viz., the Holy Ghost. The material source, and that the entire source, 
 of the conception and production of Christ, the man, is Mary, the pure 
 Virgin (Is. 7 : 14), born of the royal pedigree of David, and therefore 
 of the tribe of Judah (Luke 3 ; Acts 2 : 30). The material, partial 
 and proximate source is the quickened seed of the Virgin (Heb. 2 : 14, 
 16)." 
 
 Against the above, Vorstius, following the Socinians, asserts : " That 
 the Holy Ghost in forming Christ, the man, supplied the place of male 
 seed, yea, even of man himself, and that nothing was absent from this 
 generation of Christ except the agency and seed of a male." Gerhard, 
 in reply, asks (III, 417): "Whether, because of the peculiar work of 
 the Holy Ghost in the conception of Christ, it is right to call him the 
 father of Christ?" and answers: "By no means; for none of those acts 
 which are ascribed to the Holy Ghost, in this work, confers upon him 
 the right and title of father. The devout old authors confine this action 
 to three points. The first is the immediate energy which gave the Vir- 
 gin the power of conceiving offspring, contrary to the order of nature, 
 without male seed. The second is the miraculous sanctification, which 
 sanctified, i. e., cleansed from sin, the mass of which the body of the 
 Son of God was formed. The third is the mysterious union, which 
 joined the human and divine natures into one person. The Holy Ghost 
 was not the spermatic, but (a) the formative (d^fiiovpycK^ ) , (b) the sancti- 
 fying (dyiacriK^), (c) the completing {teIeiutikt]) cause of conception. . . 
 But, because of none of these operations can the Holy Ghost be called 
 the father of Christ, because the flesh of Christ was not begotten of the 
 essence of the Holy Ghost, but of the substance of the Virgin Mary. 
 1 Of the Holy Ghost (f/c rov nvevfiarog') ' does not denote the material, but 
 the efficient cause and operation. . . . When we say, ' Of the Holy 
 Ghost,' the 'of is potential." 
 
312 PERSON OF CHRIST. 
 
 [10] Chem. (de duab. nat., 23): " The human nature did not as- 
 sume the divine, nor did man assume God, nor did the divine person 
 assume a human person; but the divine nature of the 16yog, or God the 
 Adyog, or the person of the Son of God, subsisting from eternity in the 
 divine nature, assumed in the fulness of time a certain mass of human 
 nature, so that in Christ there is an assuming nature, viz., the divine, 
 and an assumed nature, viz., the human. In other cases, human nature 
 is always the nature of a certain individual, whose peculiarity it is to 
 subsist in a certain hypostasis, which is distinguished by a characteristic 
 property from the other hypostases of the same nature. Thus each man 
 has a soul of his own. But in the incarnate Christ, the divine nature 
 subsisted of itself before this union, and indeed from eternity. Yet the 
 mass of the assumed nature did not thus subsist of itself before this union, 
 so that before this union there was a body and soul belonging to a cer- 
 tain and distinct individual, i. e., a peculiar person subsisting in itself, 
 which afterwards the Son of God assumed. But in the very act of concep- 
 tion, the Son of God assumed this mass of human nature into the unity of 
 his person, to subsist and be sustained therein, and, by assuming it, made 
 it his own, so that this body is not that of another individual or another 
 person, but the body is peculiar to the Son of God himself, and the soul is 
 the peculiar soul of the Son of God himself" (Id. Loc. c. Th., I, 76) : 
 " Since in the incarnate Christ there are two intelligent, individual na- 
 tures, and yet only one person, because there is one Christ, we say that 
 these two natures are united, not in such a manner that the human 
 nature of Christ was conceived and formed in the womb of Mary, before 
 the divine nature was united to it. For if, before the union, the human- 
 ity of Christ would ever by itself have had a subsistence, there would be 
 in Christ two persons also, just as there are two intelligent individual 
 natures." The communication of person or subsistence therefore pro- 
 ceeds from the Aoyoq-. Holl. (668): " The communication of person 
 is that by which the Son of God truly and actually conferred upon his 
 assumed human nature, destitute of proper personality, his own divine 
 person, for communion and participation, so that the same might reach 
 a terminus, be perfected in subsisting, and be established in a final 
 hypostatic existence." 
 
 [11] Quen. (Ill, 83); " Of these two extremes (the divine and the 
 human nature), one has the relation of an agent or of one perfecting, 
 and the other the relation of one passive and able to be perfected. The 
 former is the Son of God, or the simple person of the ^oyor, or, what is 
 the same thing, the divine nature determined by the person of the Aoyog- • 
 the latter is the human nature. . . . The former extreme is the active 
 
313 
 
 principle of the ^pix a PV^^, which acts and perfects ; the latter the pas- 
 sive principle of the same nepixupvws , which is perfected or receives the 
 perfections." Kg. (126): " ILeptx&pvoig (immission, active interming- 
 ling) is that by which the divine nature of the Myog, in perfecting, per- 
 vades inwardly and all around, so to speak, the human nature, and im- 
 parts to all of it its entire self, i. e., in the totality and perfection of its 
 essence, Col. 2 : 9." Moreover its effect is, that the fulness of the God- 
 head dwells in the human nature, and both natures are, in the highest de- 
 gree, present to each other. 
 
 [12] Grh. (Ill, 412) : "The condition of the union is properly and 
 specifically called union, hypostatic union, and is the most intimate 
 nepiX&pyoLQ, or unmixed and unconfused pervasion in one person of two 
 distinct natures, mutually present in the highest degree to each other, 
 because of which one nature is not outside of the other, neither can it be 
 without impairing the unity of the person. Such a distinction is made 
 between the state and the act of the union, that the act is transient and the 
 state is permanent ; that the act is that of a simple person, i. e. of the 
 loyog, who before his incarnation was a simple person, upon a human 
 nature ; but the state exists between two natures, divine and human, in 
 a complex person ; that the act consists in the assumption of humanity, 
 made in the first moment of incarnation ; but the state, in the most in- 
 timate and enduring cohesion of natures." 
 
 Quen. (Ill, 86): " The form of this personal union implies : («) The 
 participation or communion of one and the same person, 1 Tim. 2:5; 
 (b) the intimate personal and constant mutual presence of the natures, 
 Johnl: 14; Col. 2:9." 
 
 [13] Form. Cqnc. (Sol. Dec. VIII, 6): "Although the Son of God is 
 himself an entire and distinct person of the eternal Godhead, and therefore 
 from eternity has been, with the Father and the Holy Ghost, true, essen- 
 tial, and perfect God ; yet that he assumed human nature into the unity 
 of his person, not as though there resulted in Christ two persons, or two 
 Christs, but that now Jesus Christ, in one person, is at the same time true 
 eternal God, begotten of the Father from eternity, and true man." . . . 
 
 Chmn. (de duab. nat., 25): '' To the specific difference of the hypos- 
 tatic union belongs the fact that these two natures are joined and united, 
 in order to constitute one personality in the incarnate Christ, i. e., the 
 nature inseparably assumed in the union became so peculiar to the per- 
 son of the Word assuming it, that although there are and remain in 
 Christ two natures, without change and mixture, with the distinction 
 between the natures and essential attributes unimpaired, yet there are 
 not two Christs, but only one Christ." 
 21 
 
314 THE PERSONAL UNION. 
 
 Hence, since the act of union, Christ is called a complex person 
 ((xuvtferor). Grh. (Ill, 427): " The hypostasis is called complex, not 
 because it became composite, by suffering in and of itself an alteration 
 and loss of its simplicity, but because, since the incarnation, it is an hy- 
 postasis of two natures, while before it was an hypostasis of the divine 
 nature alone. Before the incarnation the person of the 16yog was self- 
 determined (avTOTEfaor&Tii') and simple, subsisting only in the divine na- 
 ture, by the incarnation the hypostasis became complex, consisting, at 
 the same time, of the divine and hnman nature, and thus not only the 
 divine, but also his assumed human nature, belongs to the entireness of the 
 person of Christ now incarnate. Because the hypostasis of the loyog 
 became an hypostasis of the flesh, therefore the hypostasis of the loyog 
 was imparted to the flesh" (and hence there follows the impartation of 
 personality to the human nature). 
 
 [14] Hfrffr. (263) : " These two natures in Christ are united (1) 
 inconvertible/. For he became the Son of God, not by the change of his 
 divine nature into flesh ; (2) unconfusedly. For the two natures are 
 one, not by a mingling, through which a third object (tertium quiddam) 
 comes into being, preserving in no respect the entireness of the simple 
 natures ; (3) inseparably and uninterruptedly. For the two natures in 
 Christ are so united that they are never separated by any intervals, 
 either of time or place. Therefore this union has not been dissolved in 
 death, and the 16yog cannot be shown at any place without the assumed 
 human nature. For the Son of God took upon himself human nature, 
 not as a garment which he again would lay aside. Neither did the Son 
 of God appear, as angels sometimes have appeared, in human form to 
 men, but he made the assumed his own flesh, and since he has assumed 
 it, never leaves it. For, according to the Council of Chalcedon : 
 ' We confess one and the same Jesus Christ, the Son and Lord only- 
 begotten, in two natures, without mixture, change, division, or separa- 
 tion (kv 6vo <pvaeaiv, aavyxvTug, arperrrug, adiatperug, axopioTog). 
 
 [15] Grh. (Ill, 428) : " For neither has a part been united to a 
 part, but the entire loyog to the entire flesh, and the entire flesh to the 
 entire loyog; therefore, because of the identity of person and the perva- 
 sion of the natures by each other, the 16yog is so present to the flesh, 
 and the flesh is so present to the 16yog, that neither the 16yog is without 
 the flesh, nor the flesh without the loyog, but wherever the 16yog is, there 
 he has the flesh present in the highest degree with himself, because he 
 has taken, this into the unity of his person ; and wherever the flesh is, 
 there it has the loyog in the highest degree present to itself, because the 
 flesh has been taken into his person. As the loyog is not without the 
 
INTIMATE — UNCHANGEABLE — INSEPARABLE. 315 
 
 divine nature, to which the person belongs, so also is he not without his 
 flesh, finite indeed in essence, yet personally subsisting in the 7.6yoq. For 
 as, by eternal generation from the Father, his own divine nature is 
 peculiar to the ?.6yog, so through the personal union, flesh became pe- 
 culiar to the same loyoc" Form. Conc., Sol. Dec, VIII, 11. 
 
 [16] Form. Conc. (Sol. Dec, VIII, 7) : " We believe that now, in 
 this undivided person of Christ, there are two distinct natures, namely, 
 the divine, which is from eternity, and the human, which in time was 
 taken into the unity of the person of the Son of God. And these two 
 natures in the person of Christ are never either separated, or com- 
 mingled, or changed the one into the other, but each remains in its 
 nature and substance, or essence, in the person of Christ to all eternity. 
 We believe . . . that as each nature in its nature and essence remains 
 unmingled, and never ceases to exist, so each nature retains its natural 
 essential properties, and to all eternity does not lay them aside." 
 
 [17] Grh. (Ill, 422) : " The mode of this union is wonderfully 
 unique and uniquely wonderful, transcending the comprehension not 
 only of all men, but even of angels, whence it is called ' without contro- 
 versy, a great mystery.' There are various and diverse modes of union 
 which are to be removed from the mode of the personal union. For, as 
 devout old writers say that it is better to know and be able to express 
 what God is not than what he is, so also of the divine and supernatural 
 union of the two natures in Christ, we can truly affirm that it is easier 
 to tell what is not than what is its mode." 
 
 From the Holy Scriptures, Grh. (ib.) justifies the above-mentioned 
 presentation of this doctrine as follows : " The more prominent passages 
 of Scripture whicli speak of the union of the two natures in Christ are : 
 John 1 : 14; Col. 2 : 9 ; 1 Tim. 3 : 16; Heb. 2 : 14-16. As these are 
 all parallel, they must be constantly connected in the explanation of the 
 union. John says : ' The Word was made flesh ;' but, lest any one 
 might think that the Word was made flesh in the same sense that the 
 water was made wine, Paul says that God, *. e., the Son of God, 'was 
 manifest in the flesh,' and that 'he took part of flesh and blood' 
 (kekoivuviike) . But now communion (kolvuv'lo) is between at least two 
 distinct things, otherwise it would be interchange and coalescence 
 (fierapo/.T) nal av//<pvai.g). God is said by the apostle to have been 'mani- 
 fest in the flesh ;' but, lest any one might think that it was such a 
 manifestation (o>avepuaig) as there was in the Old Testament, when either 
 God himself or angels appeared in outward forms, John says that the 
 1 '/.dyog became flesh,' i. e., that he so took flesh into his person as never 
 afterwards to lay it aside. The Son of God is said to have taken on 
 
316 THE PERSONAL UNION. 
 
 him the seed of Abraham ; but, lest any one might think that it was 
 an assumption such as that was when angels for a time took upon them 
 corporeal forms, it is said that, 'as the children are partakers of flesh 
 and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same.' But now it 
 is evident that children partake of flesh and blood in such a manner 
 that, by birth, flesh and blood, or human nature, is imparted to them 
 by their parents. The apostle describes the union by the dwelling of 
 the Myog in assumed flesh ; but, lest any one might think that the Son 
 of God dwelt in assumed flesh in the manner in which God dwells, 
 through grace, in the hearts of believers, he adds significantly that all 
 the fulness of the Godhead dwells in the assumed flesh, and that, too, 
 bodily, to denote the dwelling-place, or personally, to express the mode 
 of union." 
 
 [18] The negative properties are enumerated very differently by the 
 Dogmaticians. Besides those specified in the text, the most prominent 
 are these : " The union occurred (a) aavyxvrug, unconfusedly ; (b) 
 arpiTTTug, inconvertibly ; (c) adtatpirog, indivisibly ; (d) hx^piorug, insep- 
 arably ; (e) avalhoiurug, uninterchangeably ; (f) adtaXvrog, indissolubly ; 
 (</) adiaorarug, uninterruptedly." Or, " Not by reason of place 
 (ro7u/cwc), as formerly in the temple at Jerusalem; not by reason of 
 power (ivepyvTiKug), as in creatures; not by reason of grace (xapiivrug), 
 as in saints; not by reason of glory (do£acTttc(bg), as in the blessed and 
 the angels." 
 
 § 33. Continuation. 
 
 The hypostasis of the divine nature having thus, through the 
 personal union, become at the same time that of the human 
 nature, and thus no longer only a divine but a divine and human 
 nature being now predicated of the person of the Redeemer, a 
 real communion of both natures is thereby asserted, in conse- 
 quence of which the two natures sustain no merely outward re- 
 lation to each other ; for, as the hypostasis of the divine nature 
 is not essentially different from this nature itself, and this hypo- 
 stasis has imparted itself to the human nature, it therefore follows 
 that there exists between the divine and human nature a true and 
 real impartation and communion. [1] The first effect of the per- 
 sonal union is, therefore, the " communion (also communication) of 
 natures." Quen. (Ill, 87): "The communion of natures is that 
 most intimate participation (koivuvIo) and combination {aw6vaaig) of 
 the divine nature of the teyog and of the assumed human nature, by 
 
COMMUNION OF NATURES. 317 
 
 which the "koyoQ, through a most intimate and profound pericho- 
 resis, so permeates, perfects, inhabits, and appropriates to himself 
 the human nature that is personally united to him, that from both, 
 mutually inter- communicating, there arises the one incommuni- 
 cable subject, viz.. one person." As, however, in the act of union, 
 the divine nature is regarded as the active one, and the divine teyog 
 as that which assumed the human nature, so the intercommunion 
 of the two natures must be so understood as that, between the two 
 natures, the active movement proceeds from the divine nature, 
 and it is this that permeates the human. [2] It is, indeed, just as 
 difficult for us to form an adequate conception of this as in the 
 case of the personal union, and we must be satisfied with anal- 
 ogies, which furnish us with at least an approximate conception 
 of it. Such we may find, e. g , in the union of soul and body; in 
 the relation in which the three persons of the Godhead stand 
 towards each other ; or in the relation between iron and fire in 
 red-hot iron. Just as the soul and body do not stand outwardly 
 related to each other, as a man to the clothing that he has put 
 on, or as an angel to the body in which he appears, but just as 
 the union between soul and body is a real, intimate and perfect 
 one, so is also the union and communion of the two natures. As 
 body and soul are inseparably united, and constitute the one 
 man, so are also the human and divine natures most inseparably 
 united. As the soul acts upon the body and is united with it, 
 without there being any mingling of the two, the soul remaining 
 s oul and the body remaining body, so are we also to regard the 
 communion of the two natures in such a light, that each abides 
 in its integrity. As, finally, the soul is never without the body, 
 so also the Myog is to be regarded as always in the flesh and never 
 without it. [3] 
 
 If now, there really exist such a communion of natures, it fol- 
 lows — 
 
 I. That the personal designations derived from the two natures 
 must be mutually predicable of each other ; that we must there- 
 fore just as well be able to say, "The man (Christ Jesus) is God," 
 as tl God is man;" which expressions, of course, do not signify 
 that God, having become man, has ceased to be God, but rather, 
 that the same Christ, who is God, is at the same time man. 
 
318 COMMUNION OF NATURES. 
 
 (Holl. (686): " The Son of God, personally, is the same as the 
 Son of man; and the Son of man, personally, is the same as the 
 Son of God ") ; whence the predicate " man " belongs j ust as much 
 to the subject God as the predicate "God" belongs to the subject 
 man. [4] For, if we refuse to say this, we would betray the fact 
 that we conceive, not of two natures in Christ, but rather of 
 two persons, each remaining as it originally was, which would be 
 Nestorianism. 
 
 From the communion of natures are, therefore, deduced the 
 •personal designations, i. e., such statements in which the concrete 
 of one nature (as united) is predicated of the concrete of the 
 other nature ; i. e., the two essences really (afar&w) different, the 
 divine and the human, are in the concrete reciprocally predicated 
 of one another, really and truly, yet in a manner very singular 
 and unusual, in order to express the personal union. [5] To 
 guard against a misunderstanding of these personal designations, 
 it may be more particularly stated that they are (1) not merely 
 verbal, i. e., they are not to be understood as if only the name, 
 but not the nature thereby designated, were predicated of the 
 subject, as Nestorius does, when he says of the son of Mary, he 
 was the Son of God, ascribing to the subject a title, as it were, 
 but altogether refusing to acknowledge that he who was the son 
 of Mary was also really the Son of God ; (2) not identical (when 
 the same thing is predicated of itself); i. e., the predicates that 
 are ascribed to the subject dare not be so explained as if they 
 applied to it only in so far as the predicate precisely corresponds 
 to the nature from which the designation of the subject is de- 
 rived. The proposition, " The Son of God is the son of Mary," 
 dare not, therefore, be interpreted, "The man who is united with 
 the Son of God is the son of Mary ; " (3) hot metaphorical, figur- 
 ative, or tropical ; as if, in the predicate that is applied to a sub 
 ject, not the essential nature itself of the subject is ascribed to it, 
 but as if only particular qualities of this predicate were appro- 
 priated to the subject, so that it might be said, in a figurative 
 sense, God is man, as we understand the expression when it is ap- 
 plied to a picture: "This is a man," "a woman"; or, when it is 
 said of Herod, "He is a fox" ; (4) not essential and univocal; as if 
 the subject, in its essential nature, were that which the predicate 
 
PERSON OF CHRIST. 319 
 
 ascribes to it (the expression, " God is man," would then mean, 
 The nature of God is this, that it is the nature of man). The 
 personal designations are rather — 
 
 (1) Real ; i. e., that which is ascribed to the subject really and 
 truly belongs to it. 
 
 (2) Unusual and singular ; for, as there is no other example 
 of the personal union, so there are no other examples of the per- 
 sonal designations. 
 
 But from the communion of natures it follows also — 
 II. That there is a participation of the natures in the person 
 as well as of the natures with each other. [6] This is set forth 
 in the doctrine of the communicatio idiomatum. Br. (467) : *'The 
 communicatio idiomatum is that by which it comes to pass that 
 those things which, when the two natures are compared together, 
 belong to one of them per se and formally, are to be truly predi- 
 cated, also, of the other nature (either as regards concretes, or 
 for that which is peculiar to it.") [7] According to this doctrine, 
 therefore, it is neither possible to ascribe a quality to one of the 
 two natures, which is not a quality of the whole person, nor is 
 it possible to predicate an act or operation of one of the two na- 
 tures, in which the other nature does not participate; but, how- 
 ever, not in such a way as if along with the qualities or the acts 
 proceeding from them, their underlying essence were transferred 
 to the other nature. [8] There exists, therefore, a communicatio 
 idiomatum between the natures and the person, and between the 
 natures reciprocally. [9] The communicatio idiomatum is, there- 
 fore, of several genera, of which we enumerate three (for so 
 many are distinctly mentioned in the Scriptures), [10] the idio- 
 matic^ majestatic, and apotelesmatic. 
 
 I. The Idiomatic Genus. 
 
 If the two natures are really united in one person, then every 
 idioma (peculiarity) that originally belongs to one of the two na- 
 tures must be predicated of the entire person, the idiomata (pecu- 
 liarities) of the divine nature, as well as those of the human 
 nature, must belong to the person of the Eedeemer. If, there- 
 fore, to be born or to suffer is an idioma of the human nature, 
 then we must just as well be able to say, " Christ, the God-man, 
 
320 COMMUNION OF NATURES. 
 
 was born, suffered," as it is said of him, "by him were all things 
 created," although creation is an idioma of the divine nature. [11] 
 For, if we will not say this, but maintain that an idioma of the 
 human nature can be predicated only of the concrete of the 
 human nature, and an idioma of the divine nature only of the 
 concrete of the divine nature, so that we would say : " The man, 
 Jesus Christ, was born; " " by Christ, who is God, all things were 
 created;" then the personal union would be set aside, audit 
 would appear that two persons and not two natures are recog- 
 nized; [12] but it is just in this that the personal union shows 
 itself to be real, that all the idiomata which belong to the one or 
 the other nature are equally idiomata of the person. As, further, 
 in virtue of the communion of natures, and of the personal de- 
 signations resulting therefrom, it is all the same whether we 
 designate Christ by both of his natures or only by one of them, 
 an idioma of one of the two natures can be just as readily predi- 
 cated of the concrete of the one as of the other; we can, there- 
 fore, just as well say, •' God is dead," as, " the man, Jesus Christ, 
 is Almighty." [13] 
 
 While, however, the idiomata of the two natures are attri- 
 buted to the concrete of both natures (to Christ, the God-man) or 
 to the concrete of one of the two natures (God — the man, Christ 
 Jesus), it by no means follows from this that therefore the idio- 
 mata of the one nature become those of the other ; for the two na- 
 tures are not in substance changed by the personal union, but 
 each of them retains the idiomata essential and natural to itself. 
 Therefore it is only to the person that, without farther distinc- 
 tions, the idiomata of the one or of the other nature can be 
 ascribed ; but this can in no wise happen between the natures 
 themselves, in such a sense as though each of them did not retain 
 the idiomata essential to itself. [14] To avoid such a misunder- 
 standing in statements of this kind, it is usual to designate par- 
 ticularly from which nature the idiomata predicated of the per-, 
 son are derived. [15] 
 
 General Definition. — Holl. (693): " The first genus of commu- 
 nicatio idiomatum is this, when such things as are peculiar to the 
 divine or to the human nature are truly and really ascribed to the 
 entire person of Christ, designated by either nature or by both na- 
 
APOTELESMATIC INTERCOMMUNICATION OF PROPERTIES. 321 
 
 tures." [16] This genus the later Dogmaticians divide into three 
 species, according as the different idiomata are predicated of the 
 concrete of the divine nature, or of the concrete of both natures. 
 These species are li (a) ISio-objcjc- (appropriation), or oltceioci? (indwel- 
 ling), when human idiomata are ascribed to the concrete of the 
 divine nature. Acts 3:15; 20:28; 1 Cor. 2:8; Gal. 2:20. 
 (b) Koivovia t&v &eiuv (participation of the divine), when the divine 
 idiomata are predicated of the person of the incarnate Word, 
 designated from his human nature. John 6 : 62 ; 8 : 58 ; 1 Cor. 
 15 : 47, (c) av-idooig or awafi<j>0Tepi(Tfi6c, alternation, or reciprocation, 
 in which as well the divine as the human idiomata are predi- 
 cated concerning the concrete of the person, or concerning Christ, 
 designated from both natures. Heb. 13 : 8 ; Eom. 9 : 5 ; 2 Cor. 
 13 : 4; 1 Pet. 3 : 18." (Holl. 694). 
 
 II. The Majestatic Genus. 
 
 As the divine ?jyog has assumed human nature, so that by the 
 personal union the hypostasis of the divine nature has become 
 also that of the human nature, a further and natural consequence 
 of this is, that thereby the human nature has become partaker of 
 the attributes of the divine nature, and therefore of its entire 
 glory and majesty : [17] for, by the personal union, not only the 
 person, but, since person and nature cannot be separated, the di- 
 vine nature also has entered into communion with the human 
 nature ; and the participation in the divine attributes by the 
 human nature occurs at the very moment in which the toyog unites 
 itself with the human nature. [18] But there is no reciprocal 
 effect produced ; for, while the human nature can become parta- 
 ker of the idiomata of the divine, and thus acquire an addition to 
 the idiomata essential to itself, the contrary cannot be main- 
 tained, because the divine nature in its essence is unchangable 
 andean suffer no increase. [19] The attributes, finally, which, 
 by virtue of the personal union and of the communion of natures, 
 are communicated to the human nature, are truly divine, and are 
 therefore to be distinguished from the special human excellences 
 possessed by the human nature which the ? <w assumed, over 
 and above those of other human natures, [20]. 
 
 Definition. — (Holl. 699): " The second genus of communicatio 
 
322 PERSON OF CHRIST. 
 
 idiomatum is that by which the Son of God truly and really 
 communicates the idiomata of his own divine nature to the as- 
 sumed human nature, in consequence of the personal union, for 
 common possession, use, and designation." [21] 
 
 III. The Apotelesmatic Genus. 
 
 The whole design of the incarnation of Christ is none other 
 than that the loyog, united with the human nature, may accom- 
 plish the work of redemption. From the communion of the two 
 natures, resulting from the personal union, it follows that all the 
 influences proceeding from Christ cannot be attributed to one 
 only of the two natures. [22] The influence may, indeed, pro- 
 ceed from one of the two natures, and each of the two natures 
 exerts the influence peculiar to itself, but in such a way that, 
 while such an influence is being exerted on the part of one of the 
 natures, the other is not idle, but at the same time active; that, 
 therefore, while the human nature suffers, the divine, which in- 
 deed cannot also suffer, yet in so far participates in the suffering 
 of the human nature that it wills this suffering, permits it, stands 
 by the human nature in its suffering, and strengthens and sup- 
 ports it for enduring the imposed burden; [23] further, that the 
 human nature is to be regarded as active, not alone by means of 
 the attributes essentially its own, but that to these are added, by 
 virtue of the second genus of the communicatio idiomatum, the 
 divine attributes imparted to it, with which it operates. [2?] For 
 the divine nature could not of itself, alone, have offered a ransom 
 for the redemption of the world; to do this it had to be united 
 with the human nature, which, consisting of soul and body, could 
 be offered up for the salvation of men ; and, again, the human 
 nature could not have accomplished much (miracles, etc.), had 
 not its attributes been increased by the addition of the divine. [25] 
 
 Definition. — (Grh. Ill, 555): "The third genus of the com- 
 municatio idiomatum is that by which, in official acts, each 
 nature performs what is peculiar to itself, with the participation 
 of the other. 1 Cor. 15 : 3 ; Gal. 1:4; Eph. 5: 2." [26] 
 
 If we now contemplate the entire doctrine of the Person of 
 Christ, its supreme importance at once becomes manifest. Only 
 because in Christ the divine and human natures were joined 
 
MEANING OF PERICHORESIS. 323 
 
 together m ooe person, could he accomplish the work of re- 
 demption. [27] 
 
 In order clearly to exhibit this truth, it has been necessary for 
 us to develop this doctrine at such length. [28] 
 
 [1] Quen. (Ill, 87) : " If the hypostasis of the "kdyog has been truly 
 and really imparted to the assumed flesh, undoubtedly there is a true 
 and real participation between the divine and the human nature, since 
 the hypostasis of the 'kdyog and the divine nature of the "kdyog do not really 
 differ. But as the former is true, so also must be the latter." Form. 
 Conc. (Sol. Dec, VIII, 14): " But we must not regard this hypostatic 
 union as though the two natures, divine and human, are united in the 
 manner in which two pieces of wood are glued together, so as really, or 
 actually and truly, to have no participation whatever with each other. 
 For this is the error and heresy of Nestorius and Samosatenus, who 
 thought and taught heretically that the two natures are altogether sepa- 
 rate or apart from one another, and are incapable of any participation 
 whatever. By this false dogma the natures are separated, and two 
 Christs are invented, one of whom is Christ, but the other God, the ?,6yog, 
 dwelling in Christ." 
 
 Quen. (Ill, 143) : " The antithesis of the Calvinists, some of whom 
 teach that it is only the person of the kdyog, and not, at the same time, 
 his divine nature that has been united to human nature, unless by way 
 of consequence and accompaniment, because of its identity with person- 
 ality, which alone was at first united, and thus they invent a double 
 union, mediate and immediate ; that the natures are united, not imme- 
 diately, but through the medium of the person of the kdyog." 
 
 [2] Holl. (680): "The communion of natures in the person of 
 Christ is the mutual participation of the divine and human natures of 
 Christ, through which the divine nature of the kdyog-, having become 
 participant of the human nature, pervades, perfects, inhabits, and ap- 
 propriates this to itself; but the human, having become participant of 
 the divine nature, is pervaded, perfected, and inhabited by it." 
 
 Br. (463) : " From the personal union proceeds the participation of 
 natures, through which it comes to pass that the human nature belongs 
 to the Son of God, and the divine nature to the Son of man. For mark- 
 ing this, the word irepix&prioig, which, according to its original meaning, 
 denotes penetration or the existence of one thing in another, began to be 
 employed, so that the divine nature might indeed be said actively to pene- 
 trate, and the human nature passively to be penetrated. Yet this must 
 be understood in such a manner as to remove all imperfection. For the 
 
324 THE PERSONAL UNION. 
 
 divine nature does not penetrate the human so as to occupy successively 
 one part of it after another, and to diffuse itself extensively through it; 
 but, because it is spiritual and indivisible as a whole, it energizes and 
 perfects at the same time every part of the human nature and the entire 
 nature, and is and remains entire in the entire human nature, and entire in 
 every 'part of it. Here belongs the passage, Col. 2 : 9." 
 
 Holl. (681) : " ILepix&pyoie is not indeed a biblical term; neverthe- 
 less it is an ecclesiastical term, and began especially to be employed 
 when Nestorius denied the communion of natures. But they did not 
 understand Tvepix^pv^^ as local and quantitative, as an urn is said to con- 
 tain (xupeiv) water, but as illocal and metaphorically used." 
 
 [3] Form. Conc. (Sol. Dec, VIII, 18, 19): " Learned antiquity 
 has indeed declared this personal union and communion of natures by 
 the similitude of the soul and body, and likewise, in another manner, by 
 that of glowing iron. For the soul and body (and so also fire and iron) 
 have a participation with each other, not merely nominally or verbally, 
 but truly and really ; yet in such a manner that no mingling or equaliz- 
 ing of the natures is introduced, as when honey-water is made of honey 
 and water, for such drink is no longer either pure water or pure honey, 
 but a drink composed of both. Far otherwise is it in the union of the 
 divine and human natures (in the person of Christ), for the union and 
 participation of the divine and human natures in the person of Christ is 
 far more exalted, and is altogether inexpressible." 
 
 Holl. (681): "The fathers have seen fit to describe the personal 
 nepixucrjoig- (a) from the essential nepix&pyoLs of the persons of the Holy 
 Trinity ; (b) from the natural 7repcx(oprjatg of body and soul ; (c) from the 
 accidental rrepix&pyois of fire and iron. For, as one person of the Trinity 
 is in another, as the soul pervades the body, as fire penetrates all the 
 pores of iron, so the divinity of Christ is in the humanity, which it com- 
 pletely fills and pervades. From this it is easy to infer that irepix&pqoig 
 denotes (1) that the personal union is an inner one and most complete. 
 A union is outward and incomplete when an angel assumes a body, a 
 pilot stands by a ship, a garment hangs on a man. The teachers of the 
 Church, to separate from it the idea of such an outward union, were in 
 the habit of calling the union a personal union, and the communion pro- 
 ceeding from it -nzpixliprjatq. For, as the soul does not outwardly stand 
 by the body, nor merely direct its movement, but enters, moves into, 
 and fashions it, by imparting to the body its own essence, life, and fac- 
 ulties ; so the loyog enters the flesh, and inwardly communicates to it its 
 own divine nature. (2) That the communion of natures is mutual, yet 
 in such a manner that the divine nature, as actual being (hreMxeia), 
 
THE CONCRETE OF THE NATURE AND THE PERSON. 325 
 
 i. e., as a most absolute act, permeates and perfects the assumed human 
 nature, and the assumed flesh is permeated and perfected. (3) That 
 the personal union and communion of natures in Christ is inseparable 
 {axupioTov). The rational soul so enters the body that it could in no 
 way have been separated from it, if, by the divine judgment, the vio- 
 lence of death had not followed from the fall accidentally intervening. 
 It is true that the natural union of soul and body was dissolved during 
 the three days of Christ's death ; but the divine nature of the Xdyog was 
 not separated from the assumed humanity, but was, in the highest de- 
 gree, present to it. (4) That the natural union and communion is with- 
 out mingling, mixture, or change (aavyxvrov, afwtrov, ml arpeTrrov). As 
 the persons of the Trinity permeate each other without mixture ; as the 
 soul fashions the body without any disturbance, mingling, or change of 
 either ; so the ?,6yog pervades his own flesh in such manner that in essen- 
 tials there is in no respect a giving way by either, and neither is min- 
 gled or mixed with the other. (5) That the natures of Christ have 
 been united continuously (adtauraTovg) , or are mutually present to each 
 other. The persons of the Trinity enter each other so mutually that 
 neither is outside of nor beyond the other. In like manner the ra- 
 tional soul is in the body so as never to be outside of or beyond it ; the 
 "kdyog also is in the flesh, so as never to be beyond, and never to be out- 
 side of it." 
 
 [4] Geh. (Ill, 453) : " The source and foundation of the personal 
 designations consist solely and alone in the personal union and partici- 
 pation of natures, from which they alone and immediately proceed, 
 from which alone, also, they are to be judged and explained. For God 
 is man, and man is God, because the human and divine natures in 
 Christ are personally united, and because an inner vrspcx^pw^ exists be- 
 tween these two natures personally united, so that the divine nature of 
 the loyog does not subsist outside of the assumed human nature, and the 
 assumed human nature does not subsist outside of the divine. God is 
 and is called man, because the hypostasis of the loyog is the hypostasis 
 not only of his divine, but also of his human nature." 
 
 Scriptural examples: Jer. 23 : 5, 6 ; 33 : 16 ; Matt. 22 ; 42-45 : Luke 
 20:44; Ps. 110:1; 2 Sam. 7:19; Is, 9:6; Matt. 1:21-23; 16:13, 
 16 ; Luke 1 : 35 ; 2:11; 1 Cor. 15 : 47. 
 
 [5] a. The expression concrete was employed when a personal desig- 
 nation was sought for Christ, as one who is of two natures. If the per- 
 sonal designation was derived from one of his two natures, the same was 
 called the concrete of the nature ; and, therefore, since Christ is of two 
 natures, the concrete of the divine nature, when the designation was de- 
 
326 COMMUNION OF NATURES. 
 
 rived from the divine nature ; the concrete of the human nature, when the 
 designation was derived from the human nature. To the former class 
 belong the designations God, Son of God, etc.; to the latter, man, Son 
 of man, Son of Mary. Holl. (685): "The concrete of a nature is a 
 term whereby the nature is expressed with a connotation of the hypos- 
 tasis." Br. (465): "By the concrete, a term is understood which, in 
 the direct sense, denotes a suppositive, but in an indirect sense a nature. 
 Thus God denotes a suppositive, having a divine nature ; man denotes a 
 suppositive, having a human nature. Still, a distinction must be made 
 between the concrete of the nature, and the concrete of the person ; the 
 latter expression is employed where the personal designation has not 
 been derived so much from one of the two natures, as where it rather 
 serves to designate, through an expression elsewhere derived, the par- 
 ticular person in whom the two natures are united as one person." Br. 
 (466) : " The concrete of a person is such a term or name, as formally 
 signifies the person consisting of both natures, e. g., Christ, Messiah, 
 Immanuel, which names, in the nominative case, denote the suppositive, 
 and, in an oblique case, neither nature alone, but rather both." In the 
 present case, only the concrete of the nature comes into use ;for the ques- 
 tion is only in reference to the cases in which the communion of natures 
 shall also express itself in their personal designations. To personal 
 designations, in the proper sense, such designations do not belong, in 
 which a concrete of the nature is predicated of a concrete of the person, as 
 occurs in the sentences : Christ is God, is man, is God-man. Grh. 
 (Ill, 453): " For these designations accurately and formally express, 
 not so much the unity of person, as the duality of natures in Christ ; 
 for Christ is, and is called man because in him there is a human nature; 
 and he is and is called God, because in him there is a divine nature ; 
 and he is and is called the God-man, because in him there is not only a 
 human, but also a divine nature." 
 
 It is furthermore self-evident that these designations can be em- 
 ployed only upon the presupposition of the personal union, and that they 
 are not universally applicable. Hence, Holl. (685) : " If the divine 
 and human natures, or man and God, be regarded outside of the per- 
 sonal union, they are disparate, neither can the one be affirmed of the 
 other. For as I cannot say : a lion is a horse, so also I cannot say : 
 God is man. But if a union exists between God and man, and that too 
 a real union, such as exists in Christ, between the divine and human 
 natures, they can be correctly predicated of each other in the concrete. 
 The reason is, because, through the union, the two natures constitute one 
 person, and every concrete of the nature denotes the person itself. Since, 
 
COMMUNICATIO JDIOMATUM. 327 
 
 therefore. Christ the man is the same person who is God, or this person 
 who is God is that very person who is man, it is also said correctly : 
 man is God, and God is man." 
 
 b. To the abstracts of nature ("an abstract is that by which a nature 
 is considered, yet not with respect to its union, but in itself, and with- 
 drawn from its union or the concrete, nevertheless not actually, but only 
 in the mind." Hfrffr. (283)) the like does not apply, as to the con- 
 cretes of nature ; therefore it cannot be said that deity is humanity, and 
 humanity is deity. Quen. (Ill, 88): " The reason is, beeause the union 
 was not made to one nature, but to one complex person, with the differ- 
 ence of natures unimpaired, and therefore, one nature in the abstract, 
 is not predicated of the other, but the concrete of one nature is predi- 
 cated of the concrete of the other nature." 
 
 [6] Grh. (Ill, 466): "Whatever in the assumption of human na- 
 ture comes under the union, that also comes under the participation. 
 But now the properties come under the union, because no nature is des- 
 titute of its own properties, since a nature without properties is also with- 
 out existence, and the two natures are united in Christ, not as alone, or 
 stripped of their properties, but entire, without incompleteness, having 
 suffered no loss of peculiarities. Therefore, the properties also come 
 under the participation." 
 
 Holl. (691): "No union can be perfect and permeant (perichoristic) 
 without a participation of properties, as the examples of animated body 
 show. We readily grant that a parastatic (adjacent) union of two 
 pieces of wood may occur without a participation of properties, because 
 that grade of union is low and imperfect. But, according to the defini- 
 tion of Scripture, the personal union of the two natures in Christ is most 
 absolute, perfect and permeant (perichoristic); therefore it cannot be 
 without a participation of properties." In like manner proof can be 
 produced from the communion of natures, which, just as the union, has 
 the participation of properties (commun. idiom.) as a necessary conse- 
 quence. 
 
 [7] Holl. (690): " The communicatio idiomatum is a true and real 
 participation of the properties of the divine and human natures, result- 
 ing from the personal union in Christ, the God-man, who is denomi- 
 nated from either or both natures." 
 
 Explanation of the individual notions of the Communicatio and Idioma. 
 — (a) Grh. (Ill, 465) : " Communicatio (communication) is the dis- 
 tribution of one thing which is common to many, to the many which 
 have it in common." Quex. (Ill, 91): "Not that the properties be- 
 come common, Idia/iara koivcl, but that through and because of the per- 
 sonal nnion they become communicable (koivcjvtjto.)." 
 
328 PERSON OF CHRIST. 
 
 (b) Idlofia, in Latin, proprium, property. Quen. (Ill, 92) : " By 
 \5i6fiaTa are understood the properties and differences of natures, by 
 which, as by certain marks and characteristics, the two natures, (in 
 unity of person) are mutually distinguished and known apart. The 
 term Uhujuara is received either in a narrow sense, for the natural prop- 
 erties themselves, or in a wide sense, so that it comprehends the opera- 
 tions also, through which these properties properly so called exert them- 
 selves; in this place, properties or idiomata are received in a wider sense, 
 so that, in addition to the properties strictly so called, they embrace, 
 within their compass, actions, and results, hepy^fiara nai awoTeMajuara, be- 
 cause properties exert themselves even through operations and results." 
 Grh. (Ill, 466): " Observe that the notion of the divine properties is 
 one thing and that of the human properties another. The properties 
 of the divine nature belong to the very essence of the loyog, and are not 
 really distinguished from it. The properties of the human nature do 
 not constitute but proceed from the essence." In regard to the author- 
 ity for this doctrine, Holl. (690) : " The expression, communicatio 
 idiomatum, is not found in the Holy Scriptures word for word, yet the 
 matter itself has the firmest scriptural foundation. For as often as 
 Scripture attributes to the flesh of Christ actions and works of divine 
 omnipotence, so often, by consequence, is omnipotence ascribed to him, 
 as an immediate act, from whom the divine operation (hepyeia) pro- 
 ceeds, as a mediate act. But, although the communicatio idiomatum was 
 first so named by the Scholastics, yet orthodox antiquity employed 
 equivalent forms of speech in the controversies with Nestorius and 
 Eutyches." The first complete elaboration of this doctrine among the 
 Dogmaticians is given by Chemnitz, in his book, De Duabits Naturis in 
 Christo, 1580. 
 
 [8] Therefore the more specific caution with regard to the communi- 
 catio, according to which it is said that it is not a u communicatio Kara 
 fxedegiv, or according to essence, by which one passes into the essence 
 and within the definition of the other, but a communicatio Kara cwdvaav 
 (not essential nor accidental, but) personal ; i. e., a participation of the 
 two natures, whereby one of those united is so connected with the other 
 that, the essence remaining distinct, the one, without any mingling, 
 truly receives and partakes of the peculiar nature, power, and efficacy 
 of the other, through and because of the communion that had occurred." 
 (Quen., Ill, 102.) So also still more extended definitions have been 
 given, just as of the personal union. Grh. (Ill, 466): "As the union 
 is not essential, nor merely verbal, neither through mingling, or change, 
 or mixture, or adjacence, neither is it personal or sacramental ; so also 
 the communicatio is not such." 
 
COMMUNICATIO IODOMATUM. 329 
 
 [9] Grh. (Ill, 465): "The communicatio idiomatum is of a nature 
 to a person, or of a nature to a nature." 
 
 Hfeffr. (286): " The communicatio idiomatum is a true and real par- 
 ticipation of divine and human properties, by which, because of the hy- 
 postatic union of the two natures in Christ, not only the idiomata of both 
 natures of the person (who is at the same time God and man), but also the 
 properties of each one of the natures are ascribed to the other, i. e., the 
 human nature to the %6yog, and the divine nature to the assumed man. 
 And because of the same communion, each nature works with a com- 
 munication of the other, yet with their natures and properties preserved 
 unimpaired." 
 
 Quen. (Ill, 155): " The antithesis of the Calvinists, who (1) state 
 that the communicatio idiomatum is indeed real with respect to the per- 
 son, designated by Deity or humanity, but that with respect to natures 
 it is only verbal, i. e., that it is a communicatio of words and terms and 
 not of properties. (2) They say that those are only verbal designa- 
 tions when human things are declared of God, or divine things of man." 
 
 [10] Quen. (Ill, 92): " Definite and distinct degrees of the commu- 
 nicatio idiomatum are given ; but, inasmuch as the question of the num- 
 ber of degrees or genera of the communicatio idiomatum does not per- 
 tain to faith and its nature, but to the method of teaching, some define 
 two, others three, and others four genera of properties. Yet the num- 
 ber three pleases most of our theologians, inasmuch as in the holy vol- 
 ume this is considered according to a threefold method of expression. 
 I say that Holy Scripture distinctly presents three genera, although 
 it does not enumerate them." A few Dogrmaticians assume four genera 
 of communicatio idiomatum, while they distinguish the declarations in 
 which the properties of the human nature are ascribed to the Son of 
 God, from the declarations in which the properties of one of the two 
 natures are affirmed in reference to the entire person of Christ; and, 
 therefore, the proposition, "Christ suffered," they assign to a different 
 genus from the proposition, " God suffered." Still, the most of the 
 Dogmaticians express themselves against this classification. But the 
 order also in which the three genera are given, is not the same in all 
 the Dogmaticians.- 
 
 Quen. (ib.) : "Some follow the order of doctrine ; others the order of 
 nature. The former (Form. Cone, Chmn., Aegid. Hunn.) place the 
 communication of the official actions, since this is more easily explained 
 and less controverted, before the communication of majesty, which is es- 
 pecially controverted and must be explained more fully. The latter 
 follow the order of nature, and place the communication of majesty be- 
 22 
 
330 PERSON OF CHRIST. 
 
 fore the communication of the official actions, because the former by 
 nature precedes the latter." 
 
 [11] Grh. (Ill, 472) : "The foundation of this communicatio idio- 
 matum is unity of person. For, inasmuch as, since the incarnation, the 
 one person of Christ subsists in two and of two natures, each of which 
 has been clothed, as it were, with its own properties, the properties of 
 both natures, the divine as well as the human, are affirmed of the one 
 complex ((rvv&iro)) person of Christ." Form. Conc. (Sol. Dec, VIII, 
 36) : " Since there are in Christ two distinct natures, which in their 
 essences and properties are neither changed nor mixed, and yet the two 
 natures are but one person, those properties which belong only to one 
 nature are ascribed to it, not apart from the other nature, as if sepa- 
 rated, but to the entire person (which at the same time is God and man), 
 whether he be called God or man." 
 
 [12] Chmn. (de duab. nat., 67) : "Nestorius taught such a participa- 
 tion as to ascribe divine properties to Christ only as God, and human 
 properties to Christ only as man ; such as that man, not God, was born 
 of Mary, was crucified, etc. Likewise, that God, not man, healed the 
 sick and brought to life the dead : but thus, Christ as God would be one 
 person, and Christ as man would be another, and there would be two 
 persons and tw r o Christs." 
 
 [13] Chmn. (de duab. nat., 69): "In order to show this most com- 
 plete unity of the person, those things which are properties, whether of 
 the divine, or human, or both natures, are ascribed to the one hyposta- 
 sis, or are designated by the concrete derived from the divine, or from 
 the human, or from both natures." (Id., 68) : " Because the union of 
 natures occurred in the hypostasis of the Word, so that there is now one 
 and the same person of both natures subsisting at the same time in both 
 natures, when the concrete terms, derived from the divine nature, as 
 God the Tidyog, the Son of God, are predicated of the incarnate Christ, 
 although the designation is derived from the divine nature, yet they sig- 
 nify not only the divine nature, but a person now subsisting in two 
 natures, divine and human. And when the concrete terms, derived 
 from the human nature, as man and Son of man, are predicated of the in- 
 carnate Christ, they designate not a merely human nature, or a human 
 nature alone, but an hypostasis, subsisting both in the divine and human 
 natures, or which consists, at the same time, of both a divine and a 
 human nature, and to which both natures belong. Hence it occurs that 
 all the properties are correctly ascribed to concrete terms, denoting the 
 person of Christ, whether named from both or only from one of the two 
 natures." 
 
IDIOMATIC INTERCOMMUNICATION OF PKOPERTIES. 331 
 
 [14] Chmn. (de duab. nat., 67): " But it" (t. e., true faith) " does 
 not with Eutyches and the Monotheletes confound that communication 
 between the natures with a change and mixture both of natures and 
 properties, so that humanity is said to be divinity, or the essential prop- 
 erty of one nature becomes the substantial property of the other nature, 
 considered in the abstract, whether, on the one hand, beyond the union 
 or in itself, or, on the other, by itself in the union. But a property be- 
 longing to one nature is imparted or ascribed to the person in the 
 concrete." Hence Holl. (696) : " (1) The subject is not the abstract, 
 but the concrete of the nature or person." (It cannot, therefore, be 
 said that Deity was crucified.) "(2) The predicate" (namely, that 
 which is affirmed of the subject, i. e., of the incarnate (complex) person) 
 " does not mark a divine or human substance itself, but a property of 
 one of the two natures." Grh. (Ill, 485) : " In this genus, are the 
 abstract expressions to be employed, ' Deity suffered, Divinity died?'" 
 He adds, " that they have indeed been employed by some with the 
 limitation, ' Divinity suffered in the flesh ;' " but is of the opinion 
 " that it would be better to abstain from this mode of expression ;" and 
 he proves this " (1) From the silence of Scripture. (2) From the nature 
 of Deity. Deity is incapable of suffering, or of change, and inter- 
 change ; therefore, suffering cannot be ascribed to it. Deity pertains 
 to the entire Trinity ; . , . but, if, therefore, Deity in itself were said 
 to have suffered, the entire Trinity would have suffered, and the error 
 of the Sabellians and Patripassians would be reproduced in the Church. 
 . . . (3) From the condition of the union. Through the union, the 
 distinction of natures has not been removed, but the hypostasis of the 
 Adyog became the hypostasis of the flesh, so as to constitute one complex 
 person; therefore, something can be predicated of the entire person, 
 according to the human nature, and yet it by no means follows that the 
 same should be ascribed to the divine nature. As works and sufferings 
 belong to the person, and not to the nature, I am correct in saying, 
 'God suffered in the flesh ;' but I cannot say, 'the divinity of the 2,dyog 
 suffered in the flesh.' " 
 
 [15] Form. Conc. (Sol. Dec, VIII, 37) : " But in this class of ex- 
 pressions it does not follow that those things which are ascribed to the 
 whole person are, at the same time, properties of both natures, but it is 
 to he distinctly declared according to which nature anything is ascribed 
 to the entire person." 
 
 Chmn. (de duab. nat., 69) : " Yet, lest the natures may be thought 
 to be mingled, from the example of Scripture there is generally added 
 a declaration to which nature a property belongs that is ascribed to the 
 
332 PERSON OF CHRIST. 
 
 person, or, according to which nature of the person it is ascribed. For 
 the properties of one nature do not hinder the presence also of the other 
 nature with its properties. Nor do they hinder the properties of one 
 nature from being ascribed to the person subsisting in both natures. 
 Nor is it necessary that what, in this genus, is predicated of the person 
 should be applicable to both natures. But it is sufficient that it per- 
 tain to the person according to one or the other nature, whether the 
 divine or the human. Quen. (Ill, 94) : " Such particles are h, e£, did, 
 Kara, 1 Pet. 2 : 24 ; 3 : 18 ; 4 : 1 ; Rom. 1: 3; 9: 5; Acts 20: 28." 
 By this additional more specific statement, it is furthermore shown how 
 the predicate, applied to the subject, properly belongs only to one of the 
 two natures, although, by virtue of the union of persons, it belongs also 
 to both natures. Hence the modus prcedicandi (i. e., the manner in 
 which anything is predicated of the subject) is thus described (Holl. 
 (696) : " The mode of expression is true and peculiar by which divine 
 or human properties are declared to belong to the entire theanthropic 
 person (for the properties of humanity, because of the personal union, 
 are truly and properly predicated of the Son of God, and vice versa), 
 yet in such a way that, by means of discretive particles, they are claimed 
 for the nature to which they formally belong, while they are appropri- 
 ated by the other nature to which they belong, not formally, but because 
 of the personal union.") The mode of expression is illustrated by the 
 following examples. (Holl. (697): " The Son of God was born of the 
 seed of David, according to the flesh, Rom. 1:3. The subject of this 
 idiomatic proposition is the Son of God, by which the entire person of 
 Christ, designated from the divine nature, is denoted. The predicate is, 
 that he was born of the seed of David, which is a human property. 
 This is predicated of the concrete of the divine nature, to which it does 
 not by itself belong, but through something else, because of the unity 
 of the theanthropic person ; whence, by the restrictive particle, /card, 
 'according to the flesh,' the human property of the human nature is 
 asserted, to which a birth in time formally applies ; yet the divine na- 
 ture is not excluded or separated from participation in the nativity, in- 
 asmuch as the being born of the seed of David belongs to it by way of 
 appropriation.") The proposition, " God suffered," is thus explained : 
 " The Son of God suffered according to his human nature subsisting in 
 the divine personality. As, therefore, when a wound is inflicted upon 
 the flesh of Peter, not alone the flesh of Peter is said to have been 
 wounded, but Peter, or the person of Peter, has been truly wounded, 
 although his soul cannot be wounded ; so, when the Son of God suffers, 
 according to the flesh, the flesh or his human nature does not suffer 
 
PATRISTIC DESIGNATIONS. 833 
 
 alone, but the Son of God, or the person of the Son of God, truly suf- 
 fers, although the divine nature is impassible." (Id., 698): " The 
 sentence, < God has suffered,' is not then to be explained with Zwingli 
 into ' The man, Jesus Christ, who at the same time is God, has suffered,' 
 in which case the mode of expression would be no real and peculiar one.") 
 Form. Cong. (Sol. Dec, VIII, 39) : " Zwingli names that an allceosis 
 when anything is ascribed to the divine nature of Christ, which, never- 
 theless, is a property of the human nature, and the reverse. For ex- 
 ample, where it is said in Scripture, Luke 24 : 28, ' Ought not Christ 
 to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?' there Zwin- 
 gli triflingly declares that the term Christ, in this passage, refers to his 
 human nature. Beware ! beware ! I say of that allceosis ; . . . for if 
 I permit myself to be persuaded to believe that the human nature alone 
 suffered for me, Christ will not be to me a Saviour of great worth, but 
 he himself stands in need of a Saviour." . . . Quen. (Ill, 155) : 
 " They " (the Calvinists) " explain the designations of the first genus 
 of commuaicatio idiomatiun either with Zwingli by allceosis, by which 
 they state that the name of the person, or of one of the two natures, is 
 put in the place of the subject only for the other nature which is ex- 
 pressed in the predicate. Or with Piscator, by synechdoche, of a part 
 for the whole, i. e., that while the entire is put in the place of the sub- 
 ject, yet that it is in such a manner that the passion is restricted and 
 limited to only a part of it, i. e., to the flesh alone. For example, they 
 explain the proposition, ' God suffered,' in this way: 'Man alone, al- 
 though united to God, suffered.' " 
 
 [16] As appellations of this first genus the following were quoted, 
 and their origin traced back to the old Church Fathers: avridooig, alter- 
 nation, rpoTzoq av-idoGEog (Damascenus), kva?JxiyTj nal tcotvuvia bvofiaruv, ex- 
 change and participation of names (Theodoret), \6io-oda kqX 16lotzolt]glq 
 appropriation (Cyril), a?2oiuai£ (but used in a different sense from that 
 of Zwingli), oiKeicoacg, awan^oreptafidQ. Examples from Holy Scripture : 
 Heb. 13:8; 1 Cor. 2:8; Acts 7 : 55 ; Ps. 24 : 7, 8 ; Acts 3 : 15 ; 
 John 8 : 58. 
 
 [17] Grh. (Ill, 499) : "That which is communicated, the holy mat- 
 ter of communication, is the divine majesty, glory, and power, and on 
 this account gifts truly infinite and divine." 
 
 Quex. (Ill, 102) : " The foundation of this communication is the 
 communication of the hypostasis, and of the divine nature of the 7.6yoq. 
 For, inasmuch as the human nature was taken into the union, and 
 through the union became a partaker of the person and divine nature 
 of the /Jyog, it became truly and really a partaker of the divine proper- 
 ties ; for these really do not differ from the divine essence." 
 
334 ( PERSON OF CHRIST. 
 
 Chmn. (de duab. nat., 97) : " If the dwelling of God in the saints, 
 by grace, confers, in addition to and beyond natural endowments, many 
 free divine gifts, and works many wonders in them, what impiety is it 
 to be willing to acknowledge in that mass of human nature, in which the 
 whole fulness of the Godhead dwells bodily, only physical endowments, 
 and to be willing to believe nothing of that, which surpasses and exceeds 
 the natural conditions of human nature considered by or in itself, out- 
 side of the hypostatic union ? " 
 
 Quen. (Ill, 158) concerning the nature of the mode: "We deny 
 that this communication is merely verbal and nominal, as the Reformed 
 contend" (p. 160, "who altogether deny this second genus of communi- 
 catio idiomatum. The propositions : ' The flesh of Christ quickens, the 
 Son of man is omnipotent,' the Zwinglians explain thus : ' The Son of 
 God who assumed flesh, quickens,' etc."); " but we maintain that it is 
 true, peculiar, and real. Yet we do not say that there is any transfu- 
 sion of divine properties into the human nature of Christ (whereby the 
 reproach of Eutychianism is repelled), or that there is any change of 
 the human nature into the divine, or that there is an equalization or 
 abolition of natures, but that there is a personal communication." 
 
 [18] Quen. (111,101): " For the communication of majesty occurred 
 in that very moment in which the personal union occurred. For, from the 
 very beginning of incarnation, the divine nature, with its entire fulness, 
 united and communicated itself to the assumed flesh." With reference 
 to the subsequent doctrine of the states of Christ, Quen. however still 
 adds : " We must here distinguish between the communication, with 
 reference to possession, and the communication, with reference to use. 
 So far as possession and the first act are concerned, the divine proper- 
 ties were communicated to the human nature at one and the same time 
 with the very moment or the very act of the union, and new ones have 
 not been superadded. And although the second act, and the full use of 
 the imparted majesty, were withheld during the state of humiliation, yet 
 rays of omnipotence, omniscience, etc., frequently appeared, as often as 
 seemed good to divine wisdom. But the full exercise of this majesty 
 began not until his exaltation to the right hand of God." 
 
 [19] Quen. (Ill, 159): "Reciprocation, which has a place in the 
 first genus, does not occur in this genus; for there cannot be a humili- 
 ation, emptying or lessening of the divine nature (rcmdvuaLQ, nivoctg, 
 klaTTooic), as there is an advancement or exaltation (j3eXrioatg or 
 v7repvipo(7ig) of human nature. The divine nature is unchangeable, and, 
 therefore, cannot be perfected or diminished, exalted or depressed. The 
 object of the reciprocation is a nature in want of and liable to a change, 
 
COMPARISON OF LUTHERAN AND REFORMED VIEWS. 335 
 
 and such the divine nature is not. The promotion belongs to the nature 
 that is assumed, not to the one that assumes it." The ground on which 
 only the properties of the divine nature are communicated to the human, 
 and not the reverse, arises from the mode of the act of union. Br. 
 (472) : " It amounts to this, that, as on the part of the natures, although 
 the divine is personally united to the human, and the human to the 
 divine, yet this distinction intervenes, that the divine nature inwardly 
 penetrates and perfects the human, but the human does not in turn 
 penetrate and perfect the divine, but is penetrated and perfected by it ; 
 so in the communicatio idiomatum, this distinction intervenes, that the 
 divine nature, penetrating the human also makes the same, abstractly 
 considered, in its own way, partaker of its divine perfections ; but not 
 so in turn the human nature, which neither permeates nor perfects the 
 divine nature, and does not and cannot in a like manner render this 
 abstractly considered the partaker of its own properties." 
 
 [20] Grh. (Ill, 499): "We do not deny that in addition to the 
 essential properties of human nature, certain gifts pertaining to this 
 condition inhere subjectively in Christ as a man, which, although they 
 surpass, by a great distance, the most excellent gifts of all men and 
 angels, yet are and remain finite; but we add, that, in addition to these 
 gifts which pertain to the condition and are finite, gifts truly infinite 
 and immeasurable have been imparted to Christ the man, through the 
 personal union, and his exaltation to the right hand of the Father." 
 Holl. (702) : "Through and because of the personal union, there have 
 been given to Christ, according to his human nature, gifts that are truly 
 divine, uncreated, infinite, and immeasurable." And, although it may 
 be said in general that " all the divine attributes have been imparted to 
 the flesh of Christ, still a distinction should be made between attributes 
 avevepyrjTa and k.vzpyr}TiK.a" 
 
 As is well known, the doctrine of the communicatio idiomatum forms 
 a main point of difference between the Lutheran and the Reformed 
 Churches. But of most significance is the difference concerning this 
 second genus of properties, since the doctrine set forth under this head 
 is decisive in regard to the doctrine of the Lord's Supper; for here the 
 discussion has special reference to the attribute of omnipresence. We 
 give, therefore, in this place, first, a summary of the difference between 
 the two churches, and then a more specific statement of the doctrine of 
 omnipresence. Cotta (in Grh., Loci, IV, Diss., I, 50), in the first 
 place, groups together the points in reference to the doctrine of the 
 person of Christ, on which both sides generally agree. "They agree 
 (1) that in Christ there is only one person, but two natures, namely, a 
 
336 PERSON OF CHRIST. 
 
 divine and a human ; (2) that these two natures have been joined In 
 the closest and most intimate union, which is generally called personal ; 
 (3) that by this union, a more intimate one than which cannot be con- 
 ceived, the natures are neither mingled, as has been condemned in the 
 Eutychians, nor the person divided, as has been condemned in the 
 Nestorians; but (4) that this union must be regarded as without 
 change, mixture, division, and interruption (aTpenTug, havyxvroiQ, adiaiperug, 
 axupicrog) ; and therefore (5) that by this union neither the difference 
 of natures nor the peculiar conditions of either have been removed, for 
 the human nature of Christ is always human, nor has it ever, by its own 
 natural act, ceased to be finite, extended, circumscribed, passible. But 
 that the divine nature is and always remains infinite, immeasurable, im- 
 passible. Nevertheless (6) that by the power of the personal union the 
 properties of both natures have become common to the person of Christ, 
 so that the person of Christ, the God-man, possesses divine properties, 
 uses them, and is named by them. But that in addition to this (7) by 
 means of the hypostatic union there have been imparted to the human 
 nature of Christ the very highest gifts of acquired condition (kabitualia), 
 for example, the greatest power, the highest wisdom, although finite; 
 but that (8) to the mediatorial acts of Christ each nature contributed 
 its own part, and that the divine nature conferred upon the acts of the 
 human nature infinite power to redeem and save the human race. In 
 a word (9) that the intimate union of God and man in Christ is so won- 
 derful and sublime that it surpasses, in the highest degree, the compre- 
 hension of our mind." But "they" (the Reformed) "differ from us 
 when the question is stated concerning the impartation abstractly con- 
 sidered, or of a nature to a nature; because they deny that, by the 
 hypostatic union, the properties of the divine nature have been truly 
 and really imparted to the human nature of Christ, and that, too, for 
 common possession, use, and designation, so that the human nature of 
 our Saviour is truly Omnipresent, Omnipotent, and Omniscient." The 
 controversy between the Lutherans and Reformed had mainly reference, 
 therefore, to the possession and use of the divine attributes which were 
 ascribed to the human nature of Christ; among these the following were 
 made especially prominent, viz., omnipotence, omniscience (which he 
 used, however, in the state of humiliation, not always and everywhere, 
 but freely, when and where it pleased him), omnipresence, vivific 
 power, and the worship of religious adoration, which also were ascribed 
 to the humanity of Christ (so that the flesh of Christ should be wor- 
 shipped and adored with the same adoration as that due to the divine 
 nature of the 'Adyog). Among these attributes, however, none was more 
 
COMPARISON OF LUTHERAN AND REFORMED VIEWS. 337 
 
 zealously controverted than that of omnipresence, because this was the 
 chief point in dispute between the Lutherans and Reformed with re- 
 gard to a presence of Christ in the Lord's Supper. The chief objection 
 against the real presence of Christ in the Holy Supper, Carlstadt, and 
 after him Zwingli, had derived from the statement that Christ is sitting 
 at the right hand of the Father, and therefore cannot be at the same 
 time upon earth, in the elements of bread and wine. In opposition to 
 this, Luther appealed to the personal union ; from this, and the conse- 
 quent communion of natures, he inferred the omnipresence of the flesh 
 of Christ, and proved thereby the possibility of a real presence of the 
 body and blood of Christ in the Holy Supper. Thus the doctrine of 
 the omnipresence, or, as the Reformed expressed it, the ubiquity of the 
 flesh in Christ, became \ery important, and the Lutheran theologians 
 are very accurate in its presentation. 
 
 Quen. thus states the question here at issue (III, 185): " Whether 
 Christ, according to the humanity united with his divine and infinite 
 person, and exalted at the right hand of the divine majesty, in this glo- 
 rious state of exaltation is present to all creatures in the universe with a 
 true, real, substantial, and efficacious omnipresence ?" From this ques- 
 tion the others, viz., whether omnipresence is to be ascribed to Christ, 
 according to his divine nature, and whether it is to be at all ascribed to 
 the person of Christ, are carefully distinguished. The first follows, as 
 a matter of course ; and also in regard to the other question, both par- 
 ties were agreed in this, namely, that " omnipresence is properly 
 ascribed to the entire person, in the concrete, or in the divine person of 
 Christ, in which human nature subsists, wherever it is ; or, what is the 
 same thing, that Christ is every where, by reason of his person." And, 
 from the question stated above, they further distinguished the one with 
 reference to the personal or intimate presence, which is mutual between 
 the Aoyof and the flesh (by which the ^dyog has the assumed nature most 
 intimately present with itself, without regard to place, so that the hdyog 
 never and nowhere is without or beyond his flesh, or this without or be- 
 yond him, but, where you place the hdyog, there you also place the flesh, 
 lest there be introduced a Nestorian disruption of the person subsisting 
 of both natures). The controversy had rather to do with the outward 
 (extima) presence, viz., that relating to creatures, and the most of the 
 Dogmaticians understood by this omnipresence, "the most near and pow- 
 erful dominion of Christ in his human nature." Accordingly, the thesis 
 of the Dogmaticians concerning the question is the following: "The 
 majesty of the omnipresence of the hdyog was communicated to the hu- 
 man nature of Christ in the first moment of the personal union, in 
 
338 PERSON OF CHRIST. 
 
 consequence of which, along with the divine nature, it is now omni- 
 present, in the state of exaltation, in a true, real, substantial, and effica- 
 cious presence. And so there is given to Christ, according to his 
 human nature, a most near and powerful dominion, by which Christ as 
 man, exalted at the right hand of God, preserves and governs all things 
 in heaven and earth by the full use of his divine majesty.'' Quen. (Ill, 
 185). " And, finally, it was protested that this omnipresence was not 
 physical, diffusive, expansive, gross, local, corporeal, and divisible (as 
 the Calvinists pretend that we hold), and it was described as majestatic, 
 divine, spiritual, indivisible, which did not imply any locality, or inclu- 
 sion, or expansion, or diffusion." (Id. Ill, 186.) And it was not thereby 
 asserted that the body of Christ had lost its natural properties in such a 
 manner that he had now ceased to be at any particular place. (Holl. 
 (712): " We must distinguish between a natural and personal act of the 
 flesh of Christ. The flesh of Christ, by an act of nature, when Christ 
 dwelt upon earth, was in a certain place, in the womb of his mother, 
 upon the cross, etc., circumscribedly, or by way of occupying it ; and 
 now also in the state of glory, in accordance with the manner of glorified 
 bodies, it is in a certain celestial somewhere, not circumscribedly, how- 
 ever, but definitively. But to this natural act that personal act is not 
 opposed, by which it is illocally in the fa-yog, from which presence all 
 local ideas or conceptions are to be abstracted.") To the proofs for the 
 second genus of idiomata, the Dogmaticians add also, for the omni- 
 presence especially, that derived from the sitting at the right hand of 
 God. (Holl. (714): "Christ rules with omnipresence according to 
 the same nature according to which he sits at the right hand of God. 
 But, according to his human nature, etc. Therefore, to sit at the right 
 hand of God is explained by ruling. Just as, therefore, the right hand 
 of God is everywhere and rules, for by this is designated in Holy Scrip- 
 ture the immense and infinite power and might of God, nowhere ex- 
 cluded, nowhere inoperative ; thus, to sit at the right hand of God is, 
 in virtue of the exaltation, to rule everywhere with divine power, truly 
 immeasurable, and this cannot be conceived of without omnipresence, 
 for surely the divine dominion is not over the absent, but over the pre- 
 sent.") The opposite statement of the Reformed was this : " Just as 
 the body of Christ, while he moved upon earth, was not present in 
 heaven, so now that same body, after the ascension, is not present on 
 earth ; and, exalted above the heavens, we believe it is held there." 
 Their main reasons against the omnipresence were these : " Because 
 thereby the reality of the body of Christ, of his death and ascension to 
 heaven would be disproved, inasmuch as a true human nature cannot be 
 
DIVERSITY OF VIEWS AMONG LUTHERAN DOGMATICIANS. 339 
 
 extended infinitely ; because lie who is omnipresent cannot die; because 
 he who is, by virtue of his omnipresence, already in heaven, cannot still 
 ascend thither." To these objections Holl. (718) answers.: "1. The 
 doctrine concerning the reality of the flesh of Christ is not overthrown 
 thereby [*. e., by the ascription of omnipresence to it], for it is not 
 omnipresent by a physical and extensive, but by ahyperphysical, divine, 
 and illocal presence, which belongs to it not formally and per se, but by 
 way of participation, and by virtue of the personal union. 2. The doc- 
 trine concerning the death of Christ is not overturned by it, for the nat- 
 ural union of body and soul was indeed dissolved by death, but without 
 disturbing the permanent hypostatic union of the divine and human na- 
 tures. 3. The doctrine of the ascension of Christ is not disproved by 
 it, for before the ascension the flesh of Christ was present in heaven by 
 an uninterrupted presence as a personal act, but he ascended visibly to 
 heaven in a glorified body according to the [divine] economy («*""' 
 oiKovofilav) , so that he might fill all things with the omnipresence of his 
 dominion. For Christ, by virtue of his divine omnipotence, can make 
 himself present in various ways." 
 
 .Notwithstanding these precise statements concerning the omnipres- 
 ence of the flesh of Christ, there still was no uniform and, in all its 
 features, settled doctrinal statement concerning it prevalent among the 
 Lutheran Dogmaticians. The reason of this lies in the fact, that until 
 the time of the Form. Conc. the only aim had in view, in the develop- 
 ment of this doctrine, was the practical one of showing through it the 
 possibility of the presence of the body and blood of Christ in the Holy 
 Supper. So far as this was necessary, all the Lutheran Dogmaticians are 
 agreed. But this is no longer the case to such an extent, when, without 
 reference to the doctrine of the Lord's Supper, they had to do merely with 
 the dogmatic development of the doctrine of omnipresence. As, how- 
 ever, the Dogmaticians were led by the right tact, to attribute no great 
 importance to a difference which led to no practical result, they had no 
 controversy about it, and the different views stood unassailed alongside 
 of each other. There was still room enough for different views. The 
 questions, e. g., could arise : 1. Whether the omnipresence of the flesh 
 of Christ was to be conceived of as only such a one, by virtue of which 
 Christ, according to his human nature, could be omnipresent when and 
 where he wished; or, as such a one, by virtue of which, in consequence 
 of the communicatio idiomatum, he was always, without exception, 
 actually omnipresent from the state of exaltation onward, and only re- 
 frained from exercising this omnipresence during the state of humiliation, 
 in consequence of the mediatorial work he had undertaken? 2. How 
 
340 PERSON OF CHRIST. 
 
 the omnipresence of the flesh of Christ should be defined; whether only 
 as one, by virtue of which the human nature participates in the do- 
 minion which is exercised by the divine nature; or as such, by virtue 
 of which it is present to all creatures in such a manner as Christ is 
 present to them by virtue of his divine nature ? In regard to these 
 questions, the views of the Dogmaticians, already before the Form. 
 Conc, were not alike, and the Form, itself is so variable in its utter- 
 ances on this subject that a satisfactory answer to the questions above 
 stated cannot be elicited from it. Hence it happens that later Dogma- 
 ticians of different views believed themselves authorized to appeal to the 
 Form. Conc. in vindication of their several opinions. After the com- 
 pletion of the Form. Conc, therefore, the Dogmaticians were divided 
 in opinion, about as follows, viz.: the majority mentioning the omni- 
 presence only as "a most powerful and present dominion over creatures," 
 either not entering at all upon the questions of the absolute presence 
 (nuda adessentia), or rejecting that doctrine entirely. This omnipres- 
 ence was then called also modified omnipresence. Thus Quen., Br., 
 the latter of whom appeals to the Form. Conc. (475): " (They (the 
 authors of the Form. Conc.) manifestly describe that omnipresence not 
 as absolute, as a mere close proximity to all creatures and without any 
 efficacious influence, but as modified, or joined with an efficacious influ- 
 ence, and according to the needs of that universal dominion which 
 Christ exercises according to both his natures.") At the same time 
 they assert that, from the time of the exaltation onward, Christ is to be 
 regarded as constantly omnipresent according to his human nature, i. e., 
 as always exereising the " most powerful dominion." Others, on the 
 other hand, as the majority of the Swabian theologians, but beside these 
 also, Holl., asserted, that not only the " most powerful dominion " be- 
 longed to the human nature of Christ from the time of the exaltation on- 
 ward, but also the true presence, and the latter indeed from the time of 
 the conception. A short-lived controversy arose at the time when the 
 theologians of Helmstadt and Brunswick refused to accept the Form. 
 Conc, mainly because, as they asserted, a doctrine of the omnipresence 
 was taught in it with which they could not coincide. They admitted, 
 indeed, that Christ, according to his human nature, can be present 
 where he will, but they maintained that he actually willed to be present 
 only there where it has been expressly promised concerning him, 
 namely, in the Holy Supper and in the Church. Besides, they charac- 
 terized this presence not as an effect of omnipresence, but of omnipo- 
 tence. The omnipresence maintained by them they designated the rela- 
 tive (respectiva) omnipresence. This view (to which Calixtus, also, at 
 
APOTELESMATIC COMMUNICATION OF ATTRIBUTES. 341 
 
 a later date, inclined) was opposed by both classes of Dogmaticians, 
 mainly because they wished to have the possibility of the presence of 
 Christ in the Holy Supper deduced from his omnipresence, and this 
 from the communicatio idiomatum, without agreeing among themselves 
 as to the mode of stating it. This point, therefore, has remained un- 
 settled. Another question that arose was, concerning the time in which 
 Christ, according to his human nature, assumed the exercise of the 
 divine majesty. Cf., on that subject, the topic of the " States of 
 Christ." 
 
 [21] Scriptural Proofs. — Majesty is imparted to the human nature: 
 Matt. 11 : 27; Luke 1 : 33 ; John 3: 13; 6 : 62 ; Phil. 2: 6; Heb. 2: 
 7. The sitting of Christ, the man, at the right hand of Majesty, Matt. 
 26 : 64 f Mark 14 : 62 ; Luke 22 : 69 ; Rom. 8 : 34 ; Eph. 1 : 20 ; Heb. 
 7 : 26 ; 8:1. Omnipotence, Matt. 28 : 18 ; Phil. 3 : 21. Omniscience, 
 Col. 1:19; 2 : 3, 9. Omnipresence, Matt. 18 : 20 ; 28 : 20 ; Eph. 1 : 
 23; 4: 10. Power to quicken, John 6 : 51 ; 1 Cor. 15 : 21, 45. Power 
 to judge, Matt. 16 : 27 ; John 5 : 27; Acts 17 : 31. 
 
 Appellations Imparting of majesty, Genus Majestaticum, (ielriuaig, 
 
 TzpocQijKj] /ueyaTij], v7repvipo)aig, juerddouig, dogactg, fieraTiTjipig deiaq aglag, fieroxv deiag 
 dvva/ieog, Oeuciq, airodeocia, deoTroirjoig. In the Holy Scriptures : anointing 
 viz., Ps. 45 : 7 ; John 3 : 34 ; Acts 10 : 38. 
 
 [22] Form. Conc. (Sol. Dec, VIII, 46) : "With respect to the 
 functions of Christ's office, the person does not act and operate in, or 
 with one, or through one nature alone, but rather in, with, according to 
 and through both natures; or, as the Council of Chalcedon declares, 
 one nature effects and works, with impartation of the other, that which 
 is peculiar to each. Therefore Christ is our Mediator, Redeemer, King, 
 etc., not merely according to one nature, whether the divine or human, 
 but according to both natures." Grh. (Ill, 555): "The Son of God 
 took upon himself human nature, for the purpose of performing in, with, 
 and through it, the work of redemption, and the functions of the Medi- 
 atorial office, 1 John 3 : 8, etc. Hence in the works of his office, he 
 acts not only as God, nor only as man, but as God-man ; and, what is 
 the same, the two natures in Christ, in the works of the office, do not 
 act separately, but conjointly. From unity of person follows unity in 
 official act." Holl. (726) : " The remote basis of this impartation is 
 unity of person, and the intimate communion of the divine nature in 
 Christ. The proximate basis is the communicatio idiomatum of the first 
 and second genus." 
 
 [23] Chmn. (de duab. nat., 85) : " When one nature in Christ does 
 that which is peculiar to it, or, when Christ does anything, according to 
 
342 PERSON OF CHRIST. 
 
 the property of one nature, in that action or suffering the other nature 
 is not unemployed, so as to do either nothing or something else ; but, 
 what is a peculiarity of the one nature is effected and performed in 
 Christ with impartation of the other nature, that difference being ob- 
 served which is peculiar to each ; so that when Christ, according to his 
 human nature, suffers and dies, this also occurs with impartation of the 
 other nature, not so that the divine nature in him also suffers and dies, 
 for this is peculiar to the human nature, but because the divine nature 
 of Christ is personally present with the nature suffering, and wills the 
 suffering of its human nature, does not avert it, but permits its humanity 
 to suffer and die, strengthens and sustains it, so that it can bear the im- 
 mense weight of the sin of the world, and of the entire wrath of God, 
 and renders these sufferings precious to God and saving to the world." 
 
 [24] Chmn. (de duab. nat., 85) : " Because the offices and blessings 
 of Christ as Saviour are such that in many or most of them, the human 
 nature in Christ cannot co-operate with its natural or essential proper- 
 ties or operations alone, numberless attributes iirep^uauca ml ■Kapa^vatKa 
 [supernatural and extraordinary] were delivered and imparted to the 
 human nature from its hypostatic union with divinity." 
 
 Holl. (726) : " The mode of impartation and mutual confluence 
 consists in this, that the divine nature of the X6yog not only performs 
 divine works, but also truly and really appropriates to itself the actions 
 of the assumed flesh ; but the human nature, in the office of the Medi- 
 ator, acts, not only according to its natural strength, but also according 
 to that divine power which it has communicated to it from the personal 
 union." Quen. (Ill, 106) : " I say that by means of his person, he 
 appropriates to himself actions and sufferings of humanity, for it must 
 not be said the divine nature sheds blood, suffers, dies, just as it is said 
 that the human nature quickens, works miracles, governs all things, but 
 God sheds his blood, suffers, dies." 
 
 [25] Chmn. (de duab. nat., 86): "The testimonies of Scripture 
 clearly show that the union of the two natures in Christ occurred in 
 order that the work of redemption, atonement, and salvation might be 
 accomplished in, with, and through both natures of Christ. For if re- 
 demption, atonement, etc., could have been accomplished by the divine 
 nature alone, or by the human nature alone, the \6yoq would have in vain 
 descended from Heaven for us men, and for our salvation, and become 
 incarnate man." Grh. (Ill, 556) : " The human nature indeed could 
 have suffered, died, shed its blood. But the sufferings and bloody death 
 of Christ would have been without a saving result, if the divine nature 
 had not added a price of infinite value to those sufferings and that death, 
 
PERSON OF CHRIST. 343 
 
 which the Saviour endured for us." Accordingly the work of redemp- 
 tion, as well as every individual action of Christ, is considered as one 
 in which both natures in Christ participate. The technical term for 
 this is airoriteofia (" a common work, resulting from a communicative 
 and intimate confluence of natures, whether the operations of both na- 
 tures concur to produce this [or the work is divinely-human, viz., be- 
 cause both natures here act unitedly]." Quen. (Ill, 105) ). Yet as 
 each individual action proceeds, first of all, from one of the two natures, 
 namely, from that one to whose original properties it belongs, the tech- 
 nical term for this is kvkpyrjfia (' a result peculiar to one nature'). Thus, 
 the shedding of Christ's blood is an operation of the human nature, for 
 only the human nature has shed blood ; the infinite merit which belongs 
 to this blood is an operation of the divine nature. But the atonement 
 for our sins, which has been wrought by means of the shed blood alone, 
 in view of the fact that both natures have contributed their part thereto, 
 the human nature by shedding it, and the divine nature by giving to the 
 blood its infinite merit, is the work (dTroreAeo^a) of both natures. Holl. 
 (728) further describes the apotelesmata of Christ, as of a twofold 
 order. " The divine nature of the loyog cannot effect some things except 
 by a union with flesh (for example, suffering as a satisfaction, a life- 
 giving death) ; other things, from his free good pleasure or purpose, he 
 does not will to effect without flesh (for example, miracles)." 
 
 [26] Br. (478) : " The third genus of communicatio idiomatum con- 
 sists in this, that actions pertaining to the office of Christ do not belong 
 to a nature singly and alone; but they are common to both, inasmuch 
 as each contributes to them that which is its own, and thus each acts 
 with the communication of the other." 
 
 Quen. (Ill, 209): "The antithesis of the Calvinists, who (1) deny 
 that the communication of the apotelesmata or of official actions can be 
 referred to the communicatio idiomata. . . . (2) who teach that both 
 natures act their parts by themselves alone, and without participation 
 of the other, and thus that the human nature of Christ in the works of 
 the office only performs human works from its own natural properties, 
 but must altogether be excluded from divine actions . . . (3) They 
 affirm that the flesh of Christ contributed to the miracles only as a mere 
 and passive (aepyov) instrument." 
 
 [27] Chmn. (de duab. nat.) : " This union of the kingship and 
 priesthood of Messiah was made for the work of redemption, for the 
 sake of us and our salvation. But as redemption had to be made by 
 means of suffering and death, there was need of a human nature. And 
 it pleased God that, for our comfort, in the offices of the kingship, 
 
344 THE THREEFOLD OFFICE OF CHRIST. 
 
 priesthood, and lordship of Christ, our assumed nature should also be 
 employed, and thus the acts (aTTOTeliajuara) of Christ's offices should be 
 accomplished in, with, and through both." 
 
 [28] Chmn. (de duab. nat., 81) : " For let not exactness be regarded 
 as idle, just as also accurate care in speaking. But let the question, 
 What is the true use of this doctrine ? be always in sight. For thus 
 we will the more love to cultivate care in speaking properly, and will be 
 the more easily able to avoid fallirfg into logomachies and quibbles." . . . 
 
 B OF THE OFFICE OF CHRIST. 
 
 § 34. The Threefold Office of Christ.* 
 
 The doctrine of the Person of Christ is followed by that of the 
 Work that he performed, for to accomplish this was the very 
 design of his incarnation ; and this Work is the redemption of 
 the human race. Conf. Aug., Ill: " They teach, that the Word, 
 i. e., the Son of God, assumed human nature . . . that he might 
 reconcile the Father to us and become a sacrifice, not only for orig- 
 inal sin, but also for all the actual sins of men." To accomplish 
 this work of redemption was the work assigned to Christ upon 
 earth, and the undertaking that he assumed. We designate k 
 as his mediatorial work, and understand by it all that Christ did 
 to effect a redemption, and all that he is still doing to make it 
 available to men. " The mediatorial office is the function, belong- 
 ing to the whole person of the God-man, originating from thean- 
 thropic actions, by which Junction Christ, in, with, and through 
 both natures, [1] perfectly executed, and is even now accomplishing, 
 by way of acquisition and application, all things that are necessary 
 for our salvation." Quen. (Ill, 212) [2], This work Christ 
 undertook in its whole extent, i. e. (1) While upon earth, he 
 himself announces to men the divine purpose of redemption, and 
 
 * Grh. was the first to treat of this entire doctrine under a separate head ; before 
 his day it was discussed in connection with other doctrines, usually under the 
 head of Justification; and the form, too, in which the doctrine is now set forth, 
 appears for the first time complete (though in brief outlines) in Grh. Mel. is the 
 first to use the expression Kingdom of Christ ; he does this, however, in the doc- 
 trine of the resurrection. Strigel then annexed the Priesthood of Christ, which 
 afterwards was developed into the sacerdotal and prophetic offices. We cannot 
 ignore the fact, that this topic has failed to receive anything like as thorough a 
 discussion and development as many others. 
 
THE OFFICE OF CHRIST. 345 
 
 provides that after his departure it shall be further announced to 
 men. (2) He himself accomplishes the redemption, by paying 
 the ransom through which our reconciliation with God is 
 effected. (3) After his departure he preserves, increases, guides, 
 and protects the Church of the Eedeemed thus established. As 
 these three functions correspond to those of the Old Testament 
 prophets, priests, and kings, the mediatorial office of Christ is 
 accordingly divided into the Prophetic, Sacerdotal, and Eegal 
 offices. [3] 
 
 [1] The Dogmaticians say here, expressly, that Christ is mediator 
 according to both natures, as would indeed naturally and properly fol- 
 low from the topic just discussed. Erroneous opinions upon this sub- 
 ject, that arose even in the bosom of the Evangelical Church itself, 
 furnished the occasion of giving prominence to it, and so we see the 
 Form. Coxc. already denouncing existing errors upon this subject 
 (Epit., Art. Ill, 2 seq.: Concerning the righteousness of faith before 
 God): "For one side (Osiander) thought that Christ is our righteous- 
 ness, only according to the divine nature. ... In opposition to this 
 opinion, some others (Stancar, the Papists), asserted that Christ is our 
 righteousness before God only according to the human nature. To re- 
 fute both errors, we believe . . . that Christ is truly our righteousness, 
 but yet neither according to his divine nature alone, nor according to 
 his human nature alone, but the whole Christ, according to both na- 
 tures." . . . Quex. (Ill, 212): "For both natures concur for the 
 mediatorial office, not by being mingled, but distinctly and with the 
 properties of both remaining unimpaired, and yet not separately, but 
 with impartation of the other." 
 
 [2] Grh. (Ill, 576): " The office of Christ consists in the work of 
 mediation between God and man, which is the end of incarnation, 1 
 Tim. 2: 5." Holl. (729): "If the mediatorial office of Christ be 
 taken in a narrower sense, it seems to coincide with his sacerdotal office, 
 1 Tim. 2: 5, 6. Yet this does not prevent us from receiving it in a 
 wider sense, so as to embrace his office as prophet and king. For 
 Moses, the prophet, is likewise called mediator, and it escapes the ob- 
 servation of no one that kings not unfrequently bear the part of medi- 
 ators." 
 
 [3] Grh. (Ill, 576) : " The office of Christ is ordinarily stated as 
 threefold, that of a prophet, a priest, and a king ; yet this can be re- 
 duced to two members " (thus Hutter), " so that the office of Christ is 
 23 
 
346 THE PROPHETIC OFFICE. 
 
 stated as twofold, that of a priest and of a king. For the priest's office 
 is not only to sacrifice, pray, intercede, and bless, but also to teach, 
 which is a work that they refer to his office as a prophet." Quen. (Ill, 
 212): li Yet, by most, the tripartite distinction is retained." The 
 ground of this distribution, according to Grh. (ib.) : "The appropriate- 
 ness of this distribution is proved: (1) From the co-ordination of 
 Scripture passages. It is correct to ascribe just as many parts to the 
 office of Christ, as there are classes to which those designations can be 
 referred which are ascribed to Christ with respect to his office, and 
 passages of Scripture which speak of the office of Christ. But now 
 there are three classes to which the designations which are ascribed to 
 Christ, with respect to office, can be referred. Therefore, etc. (2) 
 From the enumeration of the benefits coming from Christ. Christ 
 atones before God for the guilt of our sins . . . which is a work 
 peculiar to a priest. Christ publishes to us God's counsel concerning 
 our redemption and salvation, which is the work of a prophet. Christ 
 efficaciously applies to us the benefit of redemption and salvation, and 
 rules us by the sceptre of his Word and Holy Ghost, which is the work 
 of a king." . . . 
 
 § 35. The Prophetic Office. 
 
 By the Prophetic Office we understand the work of Christ, in 
 so far as he proclaims to men the divine purpose of redemption, 
 and urges them to accept the offered salvation. [1] This work 
 Christ performed as long as he was upon the earth; he thereby 
 acted as a prophet, for it was the business of prophets to teach 
 and to declare the will of God ; [2] and, in consequence of the 
 greater dignity and power that belonged to him as the God-man, 
 he performed this work in a much more perfect and effective 
 manner than all the prophets that preceded him. [3] But this 
 did not cease with his departure from the earth ; on the other 
 hand, by the establishment of the sacred office of the ministry, 
 Christ made provision that this work should still be performed, 
 and that, too, with the same efficiency as before, inasmuch as he 
 imparted to the Word and the Sacraments, the dispensation of 
 which constitutes the work of the ministry, the same indwelling 
 power and efficiency that belong to himself by virtue of his 
 divine nature ; and thus, in them and through them, he is still 
 effectively working since his departure. [4] His prophetic office 
 
THE PROPHETIC OFFICE. 347 
 
 is, therefore, to be regarded as one still perpetuated, and we are 
 to distinguish only between its immediate and mediate exer- 
 cise. [5] 
 
 " The prophetic office is the function of Christ the God-man, 
 by which, according to the purpose of the most holy Trinity, he 
 fully revealed to us the divine will concerning the redemption 
 and salvation of men, with the earnest intention that all the 
 world should come to the knowledge of the heavenly truth." 
 (Quen., Ill, 2x2) [6] From this prophetic office Christ is called 
 a Prophet, Deut. 18: 18; Matt. 21: 11; John 6: 14; Luke 7: 16; 
 24: 19; an Evangelist, Is. 41: 27; a Master, Is. 50: 4; 55: 4: 
 63: 1; Eabbi or Teacher, Matt, 23: 8, 10; Bishop of souls, 1 
 Pet. 2: 25; Shepherd, Ezek. 34: 23; 37: 24; John 10: 11; 
 Heb. 13 : 20. 
 
 [1] Grh. (Ill, 578): "The function of teaching is that by which 
 Christ instructs his Church in those things necessary to be known and 
 to be believed for salvation." Qcen. (Ill, 217): " The will of God, to 
 reveal which Christ from eternity was chosen, and in time was sent forth 
 as the great Prophet, embraces primarily and principally the doctrine of 
 the Gospel, but secondarily the Law, just as also the revealed Word of 
 God itself is divided into Law and Gospel. Specifically considered, this 
 office consists : (a) in the full explanation of the doctrine of the Gos- 
 pel, before enveloped by the shadows and types of the Law, or in the 
 proclamation of the gratuitous promise of the remission of sins, of right- 
 eousness and life eternal, by and on account of Christ ; . . .(b) in the 
 declaration and true interpretation of the Law." Concerning the rela- 
 tion of Christ to the Law, Holl. (760): "The old moral law Christ 
 neither annulled, nor abated, nor perfected, since it is most perfect (Ps. 
 19: 7), yet he delivered the same from the corruptions of the Pharisees, 
 and fully interpreted it (Matt. 5 : 21, seq.). Therefore, Christ is not a 
 new legislator, but the interpreter and maintainer of the old Law." 
 
 [2] Holl. (756) : " The office of the prophets of the Old Testament 
 was to teach the Word of God, to hand down the true worship of God, 
 to make known secret and predict future things. As Christ also did 
 these things, he discharged the functions of the office of prophet." Yet 
 no stress is placed upon the latter, viz., prophecy. Therefore, Quex. 
 (Ill, 218): " The office of prophet does not consist simply and exclu- 
 sively in the revelation of future things, but generally in the announce- 
 ment of the divine will." 
 
348 THE SACERDOTAL OFFICE. 
 
 [3] Holl. (756): "Christ is the greatest prophet (Luke 7:16; 
 Deut. 18:18; Acts 3 : 22 ; John 1 : 45 ; 6:14; Heb. 3 : 5, 6) ; a uni- 
 versal prophet (John 1:9; Matt. 28: 19) ; the most enlightened pro- 
 phet (Ps. 45:7: John 3:34; Col. 2:3; John 1:18); the prophet 
 having the most seals of authority (John 6 : 27 ; Matt. 3 : 17 ; 17 :5 ; 
 John 12:28): the most powerful and exemplary (Luke 24:19)." 
 Gkh. (Ill, 578): " The efficacy of the doctrine is that divine power by 
 which Christ, through the Holy Ghost, effectually moves the hearts of 
 men to embrace the doctrine of faith (Ps. 68 : 35 ; John 6 : 45)." 
 
 [4] Holl. (759) : "According to his divine nature, he has united the 
 highest power, efficacy, and influence with the Word and Sacraments. 
 Whence the Lord co-worked everywhere with the preaching of the 
 apostles." 
 
 [5] Quen. (Ill, 218): "He revealed this divine will immediately, 
 when he himself, in his own person, for three years and a half during 
 the time of his ministry, taught and instructed and trained his disciples 
 to be the teachers of the Church universal. Mediately, when he em- 
 ployed the vicarious labor of the apostles and their successors, through 
 whom Christ perpetuated, still perpetuates, and will perpetuate, to the 
 end of the world, the office of teaching. John 20: 21; Matt. 28: 19; 
 Mark 16: 15; Eph. 4: 11." Grh. (Ill, 578): "To this office of 
 Christ, therefore, belong the publication, in the Gospel, of the divine 
 counsel concerning the redemption of the human race, the appointment 
 and preservation of the office of the ministry, the appointment of the 
 sacraments, the giving of the Holy Ghost, and, through him, the effectual 
 change, illumination, regeneration, renewal, sanctification, etc., of 
 human hearts." 
 
 [6] Quen. (Ill, 219): "The end designed by Christ the greatest 
 Prophet is, in itself, the bringing of all men to the knowledge of heav- 
 enly truth. 1 Tim. 2: 4; 2 Pet. 3: 9. For all things are so arranged 
 that the blind may be led into the way, and those who walk in darkness 
 may be enlightened. Acts 26: 18. For, although it happens with re- 
 gard to some that they are blinded and hardened thence, yet this happens 
 not by the fault of this prophet, and by his work, but, through their 
 own wickedness, they bring this evil upon themselves. John 3: 19; 12: 
 39, 40." 
 
 § 36. The Sacerdotal Office. 
 
 The second office of Christ is to accomplish the redemption it- 
 self and reconciliation with God. [1] Christ thereby performed 
 the work of a priest, for it was the office of priests to propitiate 
 
I. SATISFACTION. 349 
 
 God by the sacrifices they offered, and therewith to remove the 
 guilt which men had brought upon themselves. Christ, however, 
 did not, like the priests of the Old Testament, bring something 
 not their own as a sacrifice, but himself, whence he is both priest 
 and sacrifice in one person. [2] This part of his work is called 
 the Sacerdotal Office. " The sacerdotal office consists in this, that 
 Christ holds a middle ground between God and men, who are at 
 variance with each other, so that he offers sacrifice and prayers 
 that he may reconcile man with God." [3] (Br., 491.) Accord- 
 ingly it is subdivided into two parts, corresponding to the two 
 functions that belong to priests, in that of the offering of sacrifice 
 and that of intercessory prayer. [-4] This work is, therefore, in 
 part already accomplished, and in part Christ is still executing 
 it. The first part of it is called satisfaction, by which expres- 
 sion, at the same time, the reason is implied why reconciliation 
 with God was possible only through a sacrifice; because, thereby 
 satisfaction was to be rendered to God, who had been offended by 
 our sins, and therefore demanded punishment. [5] The other 
 part is called intercession. 
 
 I. Satisfaction. — If the wrath of God, which rests upon men 
 on account of their sins, together with all its consequences, is just 
 and holy, then it is not compatible with God's justice and holi- 
 ness that he should forgive men their sins absolutely and without 
 punishment, and lay a^ide all wrath together with its conse- 
 quences: not compatible with his justice, for this demands that 
 he hold a relation to sinners different from that he holds towards 
 the godly, and that he decree punishment for the former; not 
 with his holiness, for in virtue of this he hates the evil ; finally, 
 it is not compatible with his truth, for he has already declared 
 that he will punish those who transgress his holy law. [6] If 
 God, therefore, under the impulse of his love to men, is still to 
 assume once more a gracious relation to them, something must 
 first occur that can enable him to do this without derogating 
 from his justice and holiness ; [7] the guilt that men have brought 
 upon themselves by their sins must be removed, a ransom must 
 be paid, an equivalent must be rendered for the offence that has 
 been committed against God, or, what amounts to the same thing, 
 satisfaction must be rendered. [8] Now, as it is impossible for 
 
350 SACERDOTAL OFFICE OF CHRIST. 
 
 us men to render this, we must extol it as a special act of divine 
 mercy [9] that God has made it possible through Christ, and that 
 he for this end determined upon the incarnation of Christ, so 
 that he might render this satisfaction in our stead. [10] In him, 
 namely, who is God and man, by virtue of this union of the two 
 natures in one person, everything that he accomplishes in his 
 human nature has infinite value ; while every effort, put forth 
 by a mere man, has only restricted and temporary value. Al- 
 though, therefore, a mere man cannot accomplish anything of 
 sufficient extent and value to remove the infinite guilt that rests 
 upon the human race, and atone for past transgression, yet Christ 
 can do this, because everything that he does and suffers as man 
 is not simply the doing and suffering of a mere man, but, to what 
 he does, there is added the value and significance of a divine 
 work, [11] in virtue of the union of the divine and the human 
 nature, and their consequent communion ; so that, therefore, 
 there can proceed from him an act of infinite value which he can 
 set over against the infinite guilt of man, and therewith remove 
 this guilt. In Christ, the God-man, there is therefore entire 
 ability to perform such a work, and in him there is also the will 
 to do it. But a twofold work, however, is to be accomplished. 
 The first thing to be effected is, that God cease to regard men 
 as those who have not complied with the demands of the holy 
 law. This is done, when he who is to render the satisfaction so 
 fulfils the entire law in the place of men' that he has done that 
 which man had failed to do. Then it must be brought about 
 that guilt no longer rests upon men for which they deserve pun- 
 ishment, and this is accomplished when he who is rendering satis- 
 faction for men takes the punishment upon himself. Both of these 
 things Christ has done ; [12] the first by his active obedience (which 
 consisted in the most perfect fulfilment of the law), for thereby 
 he, who in his own person was not subject to the law, fulfilled 
 the law in the place of man ; [13] the second by his passive 
 obedience (which consisted in the all-sufficient payment of the 
 penalties that were awaiting us), for thereby he suffered what 
 men should have suffered, and so he took upon himself their 
 punishment, and atoned for their sins in their stead. [14] Through 
 this manifestation of obedience to the divine decree in both these 
 
CHEIST THE GREAT HIGH PRIEST. 351 
 
 respects, Christ rendered, in the place of man, [15] a satisfaction 
 fully sufficient [16] and available for all the sins of all men, which 
 is designated as the former part of the sacerdotal office by which 
 Christ by divine decree, through a most complete obedience, ac- 
 tive and passive, rendered satisfaction to divine justice, [17] in- 
 fringed by the sins of men, to the praise of divine justice and 
 mercy, and for the procurement of our justification and salva- 
 tion." Holl. (735). [18] But while Christ rendered satisfac- 
 tion, as above stated, he thereby secured for us forgiveness of 
 sins and eternal salvation, which we designate as his merit that 
 is imputed to us. Quen. (Ill, 225) : " Merit flows from satisfac- 
 tion rendered. Christ rendered satisfaction for our sins, and for 
 the penalties due to them, and thus he merited for us the grace 
 of God, forgiveness of sins, and eternal life." [19] 
 
 This first part of the sacerdotal office is followed by the sec- 
 ond, viz.: 
 
 II. Intercession. — For, after Christ had thus offered himself 
 as a sacrifice for men, the second part of his priestly office con- 
 sists in his actively interceding with the Father, when he had 
 been exalted to his right hand, upon the ground of his merit, so 
 that men thus redeemed may have the benefit of all that he has 
 secured for them by his sufferings and death, of everything, in 
 fact, that can promote their bodily, and especially their spiritual 
 welfare. " Intercession is the latter part of the sacerdotal office, 
 by which Christ, the God-man, in virtue of his boundless merit, 
 intercedes truly and properly, and without any detriment to his 
 majesty; intercedes for all men, but especially for his elect, that 
 he may obtain for them whatsoever things he knows to be salu- 
 tary for them, for the body, and especially for the soul (but 
 chiefly those things which are useful and necessary for securing 
 eternal life), 1 John 2: 1; Eom. 8: 34; Heb. 7: 25; 9:24." 
 (Holl., 749.) [20] "This intercession has reference, therefore, 
 it is true, to all men, as all men while upon earth may become 
 partakers of salvation ; but, inasmuch as Christ can give very 
 differently and more freely to those who have by faith already 
 become partakers of his merit than to those who still reject it, this 
 is distinguished as to its comprehension into general intercession, 
 in which Christ prays to the Father, for all men, that the saving 
 
352 SACERDOTAL OFFICE OF CHRIST. 
 
 merit of his death may be applied to them (Eom. 8 : 34 ; Is. 53 : 
 12; Luke 23:34); and special intercession, in which he prays for 
 the regenerate, that they may be preserved and grow in faith 
 and holiness, John 17: 9." (Holl., 749.) [21] As to its nature, 
 it is described as true, real, and peculiar, i. e., as such, that Christ 
 is not content merely in silence to await the effect of his satisfac- 
 tion, but that he actively, effectively, really avails himself of his 
 merit with the Father in such manner as becomes him in his 
 divine dignity. [22] Finally, as to its duration, it never ceases. 
 [23] 
 
 The effect accomplished by the priestly office, in its whole 
 compass, is the redemption of men. If they appropriate it in 
 faith, their sins are no longer reckoned, nor is temporal or eter- 
 nal punishment imposed, nor does the wrath of God any longer 
 rest upon them ; for, in the true and proper sense of the term, 
 they are redeemed from all this by the ransom that Christ has 
 paid for them. "The redemption of the human race is the spir- 
 itual, judicial, and most costly deliverance of all men, bound in 
 the chains of sin, from guilt, from the wrath of God, and tem- 
 poral and eternal punishment, accomplished by Christ, the God- 
 man, through his active and passive obedience, which God, the 
 most righteous judge, kindly accepted as a most perfect ransom 
 (Ivrpov), so that the human race, introduced into spiritual liberty, 
 may live forever with God." Holl. (752). [24] 
 
 [1] Kg. (I, 150) : "The end of the office of priest is to reconcile 
 men with God, Heb. 4: 16; 9 : 26, 28 ; 1 John 2: 2." More specifi- 
 cally, Quen. (Ill, 222) : "(1) The perfect reconciliation of man, the 
 sinner, with God, or the restoration of the former friendship between 
 the separated parties, God, and men the sinners, Rom. 5 : 10 ; Col. 1 : 
 20, 21 ; 2 Cor. 5 : 18, 19 ; Heb. 7 : 27. (2) Deliverance from the cap- 
 tivity of the devil, Luke 1: 74; Heb. 2: 14, 15 ; 1 John 3: 8. (3) 
 From sin, as well in relation to its guilt, Col. 1 : 14; Eph. 1 : 7, as its 
 slavery, 1 Pet. 1 : 18 ; Gal. 1 : 4, and its inherency, Rom. 8: 23." 
 
 [2] Holl. : " The material of the sacrifice is Christ himself, Eph. 5 : 
 2." Br. (493) : " While, in other sacrifices, victims are offered differ- 
 ent from the priests, Christ sacrificed himself, when he voluntarily sub- 
 jected himself to suffering and death, and thus offered himself to God 
 as a victim, for expiating not his own sins, but those of the entire hu- 
 man race." 
 
WHY WAS SATISFACTION NEEDED? 353 
 
 [3] Holl. (731) : "Christ's office as a priest, is that according to 
 which Christ, the only mediator and priest of the New Testament, by 
 his most exact fulfillment of the law and the sacrifice of his body, satis- 
 fied, on our behalf, the injured divine justice, and offers to God the 
 most effectual prayers for our salvation." Quen. (Ill, 220) : " From 
 this priestly office Christ is called a priest, Ps. 110 : 4, (Heb. 5 : 10 ; 6 : 
 20 ; 7 : 26 ; 9:11; 10: 21); a great high priest, Heb. 4 : 14 ; a high 
 priest, Heb. 4: 15 ; 9 : 11 ; 3: 1." The priesthood of Christ is adum- 
 brated in the priesthood of Aaron and Melchisedek. The latter is re- 
 lated to the former, as the shadow to the very substance. Apol. Coxf. 
 (XII, 37) : "As in the Old Testament, the shadow is seen, so, in the 
 New Testament, the thing signified must be sought for, and not another 
 type, as though sufficient for sacrifice." Holl. (732) : " As the shadow 
 yields in eminence to the body, so does Aaron to Christ." Quex. (Ill, 
 221): "Paul, in Hebrews 7, diligently unfolds the type set forth in 
 Melchisedek, and applies it to Christ. . . . This very comparison of 
 Christ with Melchisedek is presented in the germ by Moses, Gen. 14: 
 17, is formally declared by David, Ps. 110 : 4, and is specifically ex- 
 plained by Paul." 
 
 Quex\ (III, 225) : "The priestly office of Christ is composed of two 
 parts, satisfaction and intercession ; because, in the first place, he made 
 the most perfect satisfaction for all the sins of" the whole world, and 
 earned salvation. In the second place, he anxiously interceded and still 
 intercedes and mediates, on behalf of all, for the application of the ac- 
 quired salvation. That the Messiah would perform these functions of a 
 priest, Is. 53: 12 clearly predicted." 
 
 [5] Holl. (735) : " Satisfaction is not a Scriptural but an ecclesias- 
 tical term, yet its synonyms exist in the holy volume, namely, ttaa/Ltog, 
 propitiation for the sins of the whole Morld (1 John 2: 2; 4: 10), 
 (l?xi(TT7]piov, Rom. 3: 24, 25), Kara?J.ayi) Rom. 5 : 10 ; 2 Cor. 5: 18, 
 aizo/.vrpuGiQ, Eph. 1:7; Col. 1 : 14, paying the ransom (~ov "kvrpw), Matt. 
 20 : 28. For this redemption denotes the payment of a sufficient price 
 for the captive ; and the reconciliation of God with men is described in 
 Scripture in such a manner, that it is evident that it was made not with- 
 out a ransom, which divine justice demanded of the mediator." 
 
 [6] Hctt. (Loc. Com., 418): " This threatening (Gen. 2: 17) ought 
 necessarily to have been fulfilled after the fall of our first parents, be- 
 cause the truth and justice of God are immutable, and God cannot lie. 
 But if God had remitted anything from this, his truth, as the Photin- 
 ians say, i. e., from this law, and, without any satisfaction, would have 
 embraced the human race in his mercy, then God would have lied, when 
 
354 SACERDOTAL OFFICE OF CHRIST. 
 
 he said : * Thou shalt surely die.' This truth and justice of God, 
 therefore, remaining unmoved, the human race must either perish eter- 
 nally, or could be redeemed from this penalty only by the intervention 
 of the most complete satisfaction. But this could be provided by no 
 mortal. Therefore it was necessary to be provided by Christ the Son 
 of God as Saviour." 
 
 [7] Therefore the proposition (Hutt., Loc. Com., 406): " The mercy 
 of God is not absolute, but in Christ, and founded only in Christ and in 
 his merit and satisfaction, God is not only supremely merciful but also 
 supremely just. . . , But this justice of God required, of the whole hu- 
 man race, such penalties as those with which God himself in Paradise 
 threatened our first parents, if they would transgress the law that had 
 been given them. . . . Therefore, there could not be a place for God's 
 mercy dntil satisfaction would be rendered the divine justice. . . . 
 Hence, the position remains, established, firm and immovable, that this 
 mercy of God could have had no place, except with respect to, or in 
 consideration of the satisfaction of Christ." 
 
 The love of God to men is therefore denoted accurately as ordinate, 
 and not as absolute. Hutt. (Loc. Com., 415): " God indeed loved 
 already from all eternity the whole human race, yet not absolutely and 
 unconditionally, but ordinately ; namely, in his beloved Son. This 
 ordinate love includes and relates to the Son likewise not absolutely, or 
 only in such a respect as that God willed that he should be the teacher 
 of the human race; but also ordinately, so far as he took upon himself 
 the guilt of our sins, and made satisfaction on behalf of the whole human 
 race to the divine wrath or justice. Therefore, this ordinate affection or 
 love of God necessarily presupposes his wrath, so that this love in God 
 could not have a place, unless, likewise from all eternity, satisfaction 
 had been made to this divine wrath or justice through the Son, who 
 from eternity, offered himself as a mediator between God and men." 
 
 [8] Quen. Ill, 227): " The object to which satisfaction has been 
 afforded is the Triune God alone." (Holl. (736): " Observe, that, in 
 a certain respect, Christ made satisfaction to himself. For, as far as 
 Christ made satisfaction as a mediator, he is regarded as the God-man ; 
 but, in so far as he likewise demanded satisfaction, he must be regarded 
 as the author and maintainer of the Law, who by his essence is just.") 
 Quen. (Ill, 227 seq.): " For the entire Holy Trinity, offended at sins, 
 was angry with men, and, on account of the immutability of its justice 
 (Rom. 1 : 18), the holiness of its nature, and the truth of its threatenings, 
 could not with impunity forgive sins, and, without satisfaction, receive 
 men into favor. But this Triune God has not the relation of a mere 
 
ANTITHESES OF THE SOCINIANS. 355 
 
 creditor, as the Socinians state, but of a most just judge, requiring, ac- 
 cording to the rigor of his infinite justice, an infinite price of satisfac- 
 tion. For redemption itself, made for the declaration of righteousness 
 (Rom. 3 : 25), proves the necessity of requiring a penalty, either from 
 the guilty one himself, i. e., man, or of his surety, namely, Christ. If 
 God, without a satisfaction, could have forgiven man's offence, without 
 impairing his infinite justice, there would not have been need of such an 
 expense as that of his only Son." . . . 
 
 The chief passages in the Symbolical Books are the following : Ap. 
 Conf. (Ill, 58): " The Law condemns all men; but Christ, because 
 without sin he submitted to the punishment of sin, and became a vic- 
 tim for us, removed from the Law the right of accusing and condemn- 
 ing those who believe in him, since he is the propitiation for them, for 
 the sake of which we are now accounted righteous." Ibid. (XXI (IX), 
 19): " The second requirement, in a propitiator, is that his merits are 
 presented in order to give satisfaction for others, to bestow upon others 
 a divine imputation, that, through these, they maybe regarded precisely 
 as righteous as though by their own merits. As if a friend would pay 
 the debt of a friend, the debtor would be freed by another's merit just 
 as though by his own. The merits of Christ are so presented to us that, 
 when we believe in him, we are accounted just as righteous, by our con- 
 fidence in the merits of Christ, as though we had merits of our own." 
 Form. Conc. (Sol. Dec, III, 57): " Since this obedience of Christ is 
 that not of one nature only, but of the entire person, most perfect is the 
 satisfaction and expiation, on behalf of the human race, according to 
 which satisfaction was made to the eternal and immutable divine justice 
 revealed in the Law. This obedience is that righteousness of ours that 
 avails before God." . . . 
 
 Moreover, it was especially the Socinians against whom the Dogma- 
 ticians had to defend the doctrine above stated; and, under the influence 
 of the controversy with the Socinians, the doctrine assumed the form 
 just presented. Hutt., who already in his Loc. Th. opposes the 
 Socinian doctrine at great length, states it as follows: "That man is 
 justified before God, not because of the merit or satisfaction of Christ, 
 because neither the justice of God required this, nor did Christ by his 
 death afford it, but because alone of the forgiveness of sins, which God, 
 not on account of any merit of his Son, but from his most free will, 
 grants those who believe in the word of Christ, and pursue a life of in- 
 nocence." In refutation of this doctrine, Hutt. makes a distinction 
 between three controversies. (402): " The first is, concerning the 
 mercy of God, which, the Photinians contend, (1) is not natural or 
 
356 SACERDOTAL OFFICE OF CHRIST. 
 
 essential, but accidental to God ; (2) that in respect to men, as sinners, 
 it. is altogether absolute, and is not based upon any satisfaction what- 
 ever, whether of Christ or of ourselves. The second is, concerning the 
 justice of God, as avenging or punishing the sins of men, of which the 
 Photinians imagine that there neither is, nor ever has been, any such 
 in God; just as though in the Scriptures God were nowhere read of as 
 ever being or having been angry with sinners. The third is, concern- 
 ing the satisfaction and merit of Christ our Saviour ; for they absolutely 
 deny both, contending very blasphemously, (1) that there was no neces- 
 sity whatever for a satisfaction ; . . . (2) that the suffering of Christ 
 neither was nor could have been a satisfaction or merit for our sins ; 
 . . . (3) that the final cause of Christ's suffering was nothing else 
 than that he might be able to show us the way of life, and that, by 
 means of his doctrine, we might embrace salvation ; . . . (4) that the 
 remission of sins comes to us without the shedding of Christ's blood, 
 solely by the free, unconditional, and absolute will of divine mercy, 
 according to which he is willing to forgive us our sins, and truly for- 
 gives them if we truly repent." 
 
 [9] Holl. (736) : " The wisdom and mercy of God especially shine 
 forth from the wonderful satisfaction of the Mediator, a most precious 
 ransom having been most wisely found, and most mercifully determined 
 and accepted." 
 
 [10] Hutt. (Loc. Com., 408) : " Wherefore, in order that the mercy 
 of God might harmonize with his justice, it w r as necessary that a com- 
 bination of divine justice and mercy should intervene ; by reason of 
 which, both his justice would press its right, and mercy, at the same 
 time, would have a place. We are permitted to behold such a combi- 
 nation, and that, too, by far the most perfect, in one and the same work 
 of our salvation, with respect to one and the same subject, namely, 
 Christ our Saviour. For, when about to reconcile the world, and that, 
 too, not without an unparalleled feeling of mercy, he saw that satisfac- 
 tion must first be made to justice. Therefore, he turned upon himself 
 the penalties due our sins, he was made sin for us, he truly bore our 
 griefs, and thus became obedient to God the Father, even to the death 
 of the cross, satisfied divine justice to the exactest point, an,d thus 
 reconciled the world, not only to God the Father, but also to himself." 
 
 But the price of redemption must be paid God, and to him the satis- 
 faction must be rendered. Hutt. (Loc. Com., 430) : " Neither the 
 devil, nor sin, nor death, nor hell, but God himself, was the ruler hold- 
 ing the human race in captivity, as he delivered it to the infernal prison 
 by this sentence, « Thou shalt surely die.' The devil bore only the part 
 
THE SATISFACTION INFINITE. 357 
 
 of a lictor ; sin was like chains, and death and hell like a prison. 
 Therefore, the price of redemption was to be paid not to the devil,* not 
 to sin, not to death or hell, but to God, who had it in his power once 
 again to declare the human race free, and to redeem it for grace ; pro- 
 vided only, a satisfaction to the exactest point be rendered his justice." 
 
 [11] Quen. (Ill, 228): "It was the infinite God that was offended 
 by sin ; and because sin is an offence, wrong, and crime against the in- 
 finite God, and, so to speak, is Deicide, it has an infinite evil, not in- 
 deed formally, . . . but objectively, and deserves infinite punishments, 
 and, therefore, required an infinite price of satisfaction, which Christ 
 alone could have afforded." Grh. (Ill, 579): "The guilt attending 
 the sins of the entire human race was infinite, inasmuch as it was 
 directed against the infinite justice of God. An infinite good had been 
 injured, and, therefore, an infinite price was demanded. But now the 
 works and sufferings of his human nature are finite, and belong to a de- 
 termined time, i. e., are terminated by the period of his humiliation, 
 In order, therefore, that the price of redemption might be proportionate 
 to our debt and infinite guilt, it was necessary that the action or media- 
 tion not only of a finite, viz., a human, but also of an infinite, i. e., a 
 divine nature, should concur, and that the suffering and death of Christ 
 should acquire power of infinite price elsewhere, viz., from the most 
 effectual working of the divine nature, and thus that an infinite good 
 might be able to be presented against an infinite evil." Cf. the doctrine, 
 of the third genus of communicatio idiomatum. Christ, as the God- 
 man, could afford such a satisfaction. Quen. (Ill, 227): "The source 
 from which " (Christ made satisfaction) "comprises both natures, the 
 divine, as the original and formal source, and the human, as the or- 
 ganic source, acting from divine power communicated through the hypo- 
 static union." Cf. Form. Conc, Sol. Dec, III, 56. 
 
 Note — The passages cited prove that the Dogmaticians attached so 
 much importance to the union of the divine and human natures for the 
 special reason that, if the divine nature had not participated with the 
 
 * [Referring to the doctrine found in many of the early writers of the church, 
 (especially Origen, Gregory of Nyssa), and by Lombardus and other scholastics, 
 which represented the price of redemption as paid the devil. Man, they taught, 
 because of sin, had been handed over to Satan's power. Christ offered himself as 
 man's substitute, and was gladly accepted by Satan, who overlooked Christ's omni- 
 potence, and was thus not only defrauded of his prey, but even himself was de- 
 stroyed, when the Son of God, brought within his realm, completely overthrew 
 and ruined it. It was the work of Anselm to antagonize this perversion of Heb. 
 2 : 14, 15, and to define the doctrine that has since prevailed.] 
 
358 SACERDOTAL OFFICE OF CHRIST. 
 
 human in suffering, in the manner indicated in § 33, Note 23, this suf- 
 fering would not have had an infinite value, and in this they follow the 
 theory of Anselm. But this theory still further magnifies the import- 
 ance of the union of the two natures in Christ by another consideration, 
 stating that " if this service of infinite value had not been rendered by 
 one who was at the same time man, it would have been of no avail for 
 us men;" and without this addition the theory is confessedly incom- 
 plete. Although our Dogmaticians do not expressly mention this point, 
 we may still assume that they silently included it. This assumption is 
 justified by the self-consistency of the Anselmic theory, which they on 
 this subject adopted. 
 
 [12] Quen. (Ill, 244): " The means by the intervention of which 
 satisfaction was afforded is the price of Christ's entire obedience, which 
 embraces (1) the most exact fulfilment of the law; (2) the enduring or 
 most bitter suffering of the penalties merited by us transgressors. For by 
 his acts he expiated the crime which man had committed against justice, 
 and by his sufferings Christ bore the penalty which, in accordance with 
 justice, man was to endure. Hence the obedience of Christ, afforded in 
 our place, is commonly said to be twofold, the active, which consists in 
 the most perfect fulfilment of the Law, and the passive, which consists in 
 the perfectly sufficient payment of penalties that awaited us. The dis- 
 tinction into active and passive obedience is not very accurate, as Dr. 
 Mentzer well remarks, because the passive obedience does not exclude 
 the active, but includes it, inasmuch as the latter was wonderfully 
 active, even in the very midst of Christ's death. Hence Bernard cor- 
 rectly calls Christ's action passive, and his passion active. 'From the 
 Scriptures and with them we acknowledge only one obedience of Christ, 
 and that the most perfect,' says the already quoted Mentzer, 'which, 
 according to the will of his Father, he fulfilled with the greatest holi- 
 ness and the highest perfection in his entire life, and by the action and 
 suffering of death.' The active obedience is his conformity with the 
 very Law. And therefore, properly and accurately, and by itself, it is 
 called obedience. But what is ordinarily called passive obedience is the 
 enduring of a penalty inflicted upon the violator of the law. If this is 
 to be named obedience, it will be so called in a broad sense or from its 
 result, for it is certain that alone and without the accompaniment of 
 active obedience, it is not conformity with the very law. . . . The obe- 
 dience of Christ is with less accuracy called passive, because he volun- 
 tarily did and suffered all things for us and our salvation." 
 
 [13] Holl. (737): "By his active obedience, Christ most exactly 
 fulfilled the divine law in our stead, in order that penitent sinners, ap- 
 
HIS ACTIVE OBEDIENCE. 359 
 
 plying to themselves, by true faith, this vicarious fulfilment of the law, 
 might be accounted righteous before God, the judge, Gal. 4: 4, 5 ; 
 Rom. 10; 4; Matt. 5: 17." 
 
 In the doctrine of the active obedience, the following points come 
 into consideration : (1) That God could not forgive us if we could not 
 be considered as such as had satisfied the demands of the divine law. 
 Quen. (Ill, 244) ; "For, inasmuch as man was not only to be freed 
 from the wrath of God as a just judge, but also, in order that he might 
 stand before God, there was a necessity for righteousness which he could 
 not attain except by the fulfillment of the law, Christ took upon himself 
 both, and not only sufifered for us, but also made satisfaction to the law 
 in all things, in order that this his fulfillment and obedience might 
 be imputed to us. (2) That Christ was subject to the law not 
 for his own person." Quen. (Ill, 246): "The cause on account of 
 which the Son of God was subject to the law was not his own obligation ; 
 for Christ, not only as God, but also according to his human nature, 
 was in no way subject to the law. . . . For Christ, with respect to 
 himself, was the Lord of the entire law, and not its servant, Mark 2 : 
 28. And, although he was and is the seed of Abraham, yet, because in 
 the unity of his person he was and is the Son of God, he was not sub- 
 ject to the law with respect to himself." (3) That consequently as 
 Christ has nevertheless fulfilled the law, he has done it in our stead. 
 Grh. : " Rom. 8 : 3. Here there is ascribed to the Son of God the ful- 
 fillment of the law, which it was impossible for us to render, in order 
 that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us through faith, 
 viz., through Christ, cf. Rom. 5: 8; Phil. 3: 9. The Son of God, 
 therefore, was sent to render that which, because of weakness, was im- 
 possible for us, and it was therefore necessary that the Son of God him- 
 self should fulfil the law for us, in order that the righteousness demanded 
 by the law and rendered by him might become ours through the impu- 
 tation of faith, and thus, in God's judgment, according to his reckoning, 
 might be fulfilled or be able to be regarded as fulfilled by us." Christ 
 engaged himself to fulfil the law on our account, as Calov. (VII, 424) 
 asserts, already through "circumcision, which to him was not a means 
 of regeneration or renewal, because he needed neither; wherefore, for 
 no other reason, except for our sake, he submitted to circumcision, and 
 through the same put himself under obligation to render a fulfilment of 
 the law, that should be vicarious or in our place." 
 
 Concerning the nature of the law that Christ fulfilled, Holl. (737) : 
 " The law to which he was subject is understood both as the universal 
 or moral, and the particular, i. e., the ceremonial and forensic." Quen. 
 
360 SACERDOTAL OFFICE OF CHRIST. 
 
 (Ill, 245): " And the law was thus fulfilled by the Lord, (1) the cere- 
 monial, by showing its true end and scope, and fulfilling all the shadows 
 and types which adumbrated either his person or office ; (2) the judicial, 
 both by fulfilling those things which in it were typical, and by reaffirm- 
 ing those things which in it belonged to common, natural, and perpetual 
 law ; (3) the moral, in so far as by his perfect obedience, and the con- 
 formity of all the actions of his life, he observed the law without any 
 sin and defect, reaffirmed the doctrine of the law which had been cor- 
 rupted by the Pharisees, and restored it to its native integrity and per- 
 fection." 
 
 Andr. Osiander gave occasion to the supplementing of the passive by 
 the active obedience. The doctrine was first developed by Flacius (in 
 his work " Concerning Righteousnesses. Osiander," 1552) in the follow- 
 ing manner : " The justice of God, as revealed in the law, demands of 
 us, poor, unrighteous, disobedient men, two items of righteousness. The 
 first is, that we render to God complete satisfaction for the transgression 
 and sin already committed ; the second, that we thenceforth be heartily 
 and perfectly obedient to his law if we wish to enter into life. If we 
 do not thus accomplish this, it threatens us with eternal damnation. 
 And therefore this essential justice of God includes us under sin and 
 the wrath of God. . . . Now there are often two parts of this right- 
 eousness due to the law ; the former, the complete satisfaction of pun- 
 ishment for sin committed, for, since it is right and proper to punish a 
 sinner, one part of righteousness is willingly to suffer the merited pun- 
 ishment. The other part is perfect obedience, which should then follow 
 and be rendered. Therefore the righteousness of the obedience of 
 Christ, which he rendered to the law for us, consists in these two fea- 
 tures, viz., in his suffering and in the perfection of his obedience to the 
 commands of God." 
 
 The Form Conc. (Sol. Dec, III, 14) states the doctrine thus: 
 " Therefore the righteousness which, out of pure grace, is imputed be- 
 fore God to faith or believers, is the obedience, the suffering, and the 
 resurrection of Christ, by which, for our sake, he made satisfaction to 
 the law and expiated our sins. For since Christ is not only man, but 
 God and man in one undivided person by reason of his own person, he 
 was no more subject to the law than he was to suffering and death, as 
 he was the Lord of the law. For this reason, his obedience (not only 
 that by which in his entire passion and death he obeyed the Father, but 
 also that by which, for our sake, he voluntarily subjected himself to the 
 law and fulfilled it by his obedience) is imputed to us for righteousness, 
 so that because of the entire obedience which, for our sake, Christ ren- 
 
HIS PASSIVE OBEDIENCE. 361 
 
 dered his Heavenly Father, both by doing and suffering, God forgives 
 us our sins." Cf. Ill, 57. Intimations of this doctrine occur, indeed, 
 already in the writings of earlier theologians, even in those of Luther, 
 but before the time of the Form. Conc, the obedience of Christ was 
 considered mainly with reference to his sufferings. Thus Mel. (Loc. 
 c. Th., II, 212): "Since, therefore, men did not afford obedience, it 
 was necessary either that they should perish as a punishment, or that 
 another one pay the penalty or ransom ; therefore by his wonderful and 
 unerring counsel, the Son of God, by interceding for us, paid the ran- 
 som, and drew upon himself the wrath which we ought to have borne ; 
 wherefore, God did not abate his law without a compensation, but pre- 
 served his justice in demanding punishment. Christ therefore says, 
 1 1 am not come to destroy, but to fulfil the law,' namely, by undergoing 
 'punishment for the human race and by teaching 4.nd restoring the law in 
 believers." And at the time, and even after the time of Osiander, many 
 divines contented themselves with thus stating it, and to the passive 
 obedience added a further obedience only in this sense, viz., that the 
 obedience of Christ manifested itself not only in suffering, but also 
 throughout his entire holy life. Thus Grh. states it (VII, 60), who, 
 however, in other passages, expresses himself as favoring the active 
 obedience in the sense of the Form, Conc.) : " It remains for us to in- 
 quire by what means Christ merited the righteousness that avails before 
 God. TTe reply, from the Scriptures, that the entire obedience of 
 Christ, the active as well as the passive, that of his life as well as that 
 of his death, concur in procuring this merit. For, although in many 
 passages of Scripture the work of redemption is ascribed to Christ's 
 death and the shedding of his blood, yet this must be received by no 
 means exclusively, as though by it the holy life of Christ were excluded 
 from the work of redemption, but it must be regarded as occurring for the 
 reason that nowhere does the fact that the Lord has loved and redeemed 
 us, shine forth more clearly than in his passion, death, and wounds, as 
 the devout old teachers say; and because the death of Christ is, as it 
 were, the last line and completion, the reloq, the end and perfection of 
 the entire obedience, as the apostle says, Phil. 2 : 8. That it is alto- 
 gether impossible in this merit to separate the active from the passive 
 obedience, is evident, because even in the death of Christ the voluntary 
 obedience and the most ardent love concur, of which the former respects 
 the Heavenly Father, and the latter us men, John 10 : 18 ; Gal. 2 : 20." 
 Direct opposition to the distinction drawn by Osiander was first made 
 among the Lutheran theologians by Parsimonius (1563), who soon, 
 however, withdrew it. He said: " The law binds to either obedience 
 24 
 
362 SACERDOTAL OFFICE OF CHRIST. 
 
 or punishment, not both at once. Therefore, because Christ endured 
 the punishment for us, he thereby rendered obedience for himself." 
 Also : " What he rendered, that we dare not render, and are under no 
 obligation to do it. But we must render obedience to the law. Christ 
 therefore did not render obedience to the law for us, but for himself, 
 that he might be an offering unspotted and acceptable to God." (Arnold, 
 " Kirchen und Ketzer Geschiclite" vol. ii, pt. xvi, ch. xxx, § 12.) On 
 the part of the Reformed, the chief opposition to this doctrine came 
 from John Piscator, in Herborn. [His arguments are answered at 
 length by Grh., vii, 70, sqq. : "The suffering of penalties alone is not 
 the righteousness of the Law, for then it would follow that the con- 
 demned most perfectly fulfill the law; since they endure the most exqui- 
 site punishments for their sins. . . . The passion of Christ would not 
 have profited had it not been combined with most full and perfect obedi- 
 ence to the law. . . .The active obedience alone would not have been 
 sufficient, because punishment was to be expiated for the sins of the 
 human race ; the passive obedience alone would not have been sufficient, 
 because if the sins were to be expiated, perfect obedience to each and 
 every precept of the Law was required, i. e., the passive obedience 
 had to be that of one who had most fully met every demand of active 
 obedience. ..." Rational creatures not yet fallen into sin, the Law 
 places under either punishment or obedience. The holy angels it obliges 
 only to obedience, but in no way to punishment. Adam, in the state of 
 innocency, it obliges only to obedience, but not at the same time, except 
 conditionally, to punishment. For, where there is no transgression, 
 there is no punishment. But rational creatures that have fallen into 
 sin, it obliges to both punishment and obedience; to obedience, so far 
 as they are rational creatures ; to punishment, because they have fallen 
 into sin. Thus, since the fall, Adam, and all his posterity are under 
 obligation at the same time, both of punishment and obedience, because 
 the obligation to obedience is in no way abated by a fall, but on the 
 other hand, a new obligation has entered, viz.j, that of the endurance of 
 punishment for sin."] 
 
 For the history of the doctrine of the active obedience, see Fr. H. R. 
 Frank: " The Theology of the Form. Conor II, 1861. J. G. Thoma- 
 asius : " The Person and Work of Christ," Part III, Division 1, sec- 
 ond edition, 1863. 
 
 [14] Holl. (737): " By the passive obedience, Christ transferred to 
 himself the sins of the whole world (2 Cor. 5 : 31 ; Gal. 3 : 13), and be- 
 sides this suffered the punishments due them, by shedding his most pre- 
 cious blood, and meeting for all sinners the most ignominous death (Is. 
 
VICARIOUS SATISFACTION. 363 
 
 53:4; 1 Pet. 2:24; John 1:29; Rom. 4 : 25 ; Gal. 1:4; 1 Cor. 15 : 3 ; 
 1 Pet. 3:18; Heb. 10 : 12 , Rom. 6 : 23 ; Heb. 9 : 28), in order that, 
 to believers in Christ the Redeemer, sins might not be imputed for eter- 
 nal punishment." To the satisfactory sufferings of Christ, there are re- 
 ferred (Quen. Ill, 253): " All the acts of Christ, from the first moment 
 of conception to the three days of his atoning death, as his lying hid for 
 nine months in the womb of the virgin, his being born in poverty, his 
 living in constant misery, his bearing hunger, thirst and cold. For he 
 bore all these things for us and our sake." Nevertheless the passive obe- 
 dience is said to consist " especially of death, and the yielding up of the 
 spirit." 
 
 [15] The satisfaction which Christ has made is, therefore, a vicari- 
 ous satisfaction. Holl. (737): "To a vicarious penal satisfaction, (a) 
 if it he formally regarded, there is required: 1. A surrogation, by which 
 some one else is substituted in the place of a debtor, and there is a trans- 
 fer of the crime, or an imputation of the charge made against another. 
 2. A payment of penalties, which the substituted bondsman or surety 
 makes in the place of the debtor ; (b) considered with regard to the end, 
 the payment of the penalty, for obtaining the discharge of the debtor, 
 occurs in such a way that is declared free from the crime and penalty." 
 The attacks of the Socinians against the vicarious satisfaction are 
 refuted by Grh. (VII, 1. xvii, c. ii, § 37, seq.), and Quen. (De officio 
 Christi, pars polemica, qu. 6). The chief objection: "The action of 
 one cannot be the action ot another; the fulfillment of the law is an 
 action of Christ ; therefore the fulfillment of the law cannot be our ac- 
 tion," Holl. (734) refutes thus : " An action is considered either phy- 
 sically, as it is the motion of one acting, or morally, as it is good or evil. 
 The action of one can be that of another by imputation, not physically, 
 but morally." 
 
 [The argument of Grh. is: 1. Christ is our mediator, 1 Tim. 2:5; 
 Heb. 8: 6; 9: 15; 12: 24. 2. Our redeemer, Ps. Ill: 9; Luke 1: 
 68 ; 2 : 38 ; Rom. 3 : 24 ; 1 Cor. 1 : 30 ; Eph. 1:7; Col. 1 : 14 ; 1 
 Tim. 2:6; Heb. 9: 12,-15; 1 Pet. 1 : 18 ; Rev. 5 : 9. 3. The 
 llaojubg, propitiation for our sins, 1 John 2 : 2 ; 4 : 10 ; Rom. 3 : 24, 25. 
 4. By him we are reconciled to God, Is. 63 : 3; cf. Rev. 19 : 13 ; John 
 1:17; Rom. 5 : 10, 11 ; 2 Cor. 5 : 18, 19 ; Eph. 2 : 16 ; 5 : 2 ; Col. 
 1 : 20. 5. He gave his life a Ivrpov nai avrilvrpov for us, Math. 20 : 28 ; 
 Mark 10 : 45 ; 1 Tim. 2 : 5, 6, the latter meaning properly an equiva- 
 lent compensation ; and hence the benefit acquired is said to be Xvrpuaig 
 and a-olvrpocig, Luke 1 : 68 ; Tit, 2: 14; 1 Pet. 1: 18; Heb. 9: 15. 
 6. He was made sin for us, 2 Cor. 5:21; Rom. 8:3. 7. He became 
 
364 SACERDOTAL OFFICE OF CHRIST. 
 
 a curse for us, Gal. 3 : 13. 8. He took upon himself our sins and their 
 punishment, Ps. 69 ; 4 ; Is. 43 : 24, 25 ; 53 : 4, 6, 8 ; John 1 : 29 ; 1 
 Pet. 2: 24. Here belongs the scape-goat, Lev. 16: 20, as a type of 
 Christ, John 1 : 29. 9. He shed his blood for our sins, Math. 26 : 28 ; 
 1 John 1:7; Heb. 9 : 13, 14. 10. He blotted out the indictment, 
 Col. 2 : 14. 11. He freed us from the curse of the Lord, Gal. 3 : 13 ; 
 4 : 5. 12. From the wrath of God, 1 Thess. 1 : 10. 13. From eternal 
 condemnation, 1 Thess. 5: 9, 11. 14. In Christ we are righteous and 
 beloved, 2 Cor. 5 : 21. 
 
 The counter arguments of the Socinians are then examined; e. g. 
 Against (1) they urge, that Moses was also a mediator. This is con- 
 ceded. But there is more in the antitype than in the type. The man- 
 ner in which Christ is said to be mediator is especially taught in Scrip- 
 ture, 1 Tim. 2 : 4, 5, 6 ; Heb. 9 : 15. Against (2) that redemption 
 means only simple liberation without an intervening price of satisfac- 
 tion. It is conceded that the word redeem is so used in some passages, 
 but not in those which refer to Christ as our redeemer, 1 Cor. 6 : 20 ; 
 1 Pet. 1 : 18, 19 ; Gal. 3 : 13 ; Eph. 1:7; Tit. 2 : 14; Heb. 9 : 12, 
 15 ; Rev. 5 : 9. Against (4) that the reconciliation is not of men with 
 God, but of men with themselves, %. e., of Gentiles with Jews, and of 
 men with angels. It is conceded that in Eph. 2, the apostle is speak- 
 ing of the antagonism between Jews and Greeks, and in Col. 1, of that 
 between angels and men ; but from this it does not follow, that there is 
 no reference to the removal of the dissent between men and God by 
 Christ's satisfaction ; for it is distinctly said, Eph. 2:16, therefore he 
 reconciled the Gentiles not only to the Jews, but also to God himself, 
 vs. 13, 18, 19. So according to Col. 1, angels are reconciled to men, 
 because, through Christ, the human race is reconciled to God. That 
 we are reconciled to God through Christ, Scripture clearly asserts ; but 
 from this, it neither can, nor should be inferred that God is not recon- 
 ciled to us through Christ, but rather that the one follows from the 
 other As we could not be reconciled to God, unless God were recon- 
 ciled to us, the Apostle says (Rom. 5 : 10) < " When we were enemies, 
 we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son," etc. 
 
 Among the general objections of the Socinians, the chief is that any 
 satisfaction conflicts with the gratuitous remission of sins ; as a creditor 
 cannot be said to remit a debt gratuitously, for which a satisfaction is 
 rendered. Grh. answers that there is no opposition, but only a subor- 
 dination, Rom. 3 : 24 ; ' Being justified freely by his grace ' (gratuitous 
 remission) ' through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus ' (satisfac- 
 tion). Eph. 1:7; 'In whom we have redemption through his blood' 
 
COMPLETENESS OF THE SATISFACTION. 365 
 
 (satisfaction), * the forgiveness of sins according to the riches of his 
 grace' (gratuitous remission). As the grace of God does not destroy the 
 justice of God, so gratuitous remission does not annul the merit and 
 satisfaction of Christ which the Law demands. Nor was God a mere 
 creditor, but also a most just judge and avenger of sins; nor were sins 
 mere debts, but they conflict with the immutable justice of God revealed 
 in the Law. In short, the particle freely excludes our worth, our 
 merits, our satisfaction ; but in no way the satisfaction of Christ. The 
 mercy of God remitting sins is gratuitous ; but not so absolute as to ex- 
 clude the merit of Christ."] 
 
 [16] Quen. (Ill, 246) : "The form or formal mode of the satisfac- 
 tion consists in the most exact and sufficient payment of all those things 
 which we owed. . . . Indeed this very payment of the entire debt of 
 another, freely undertaken by Christ, and imputed to him, in the divine 
 judgment, was sufficient, not merely because accepted of God. For in 
 this satisfaction God did not, out of liberality, accept of anything that 
 was not such in itself, neither in demanding a punishment due us and 
 rendered by a surety did he abate anything, but in this satisfaction 
 Christ bore everything that the rigor of his justice demanded, so that 
 he endured even the very punishments of hell, although not in hell, or 
 eternally. . . . Therefore the satisfaction of Christ is most sufficient 
 and complete by itself, or from its own infinite, intrinsic value, which 
 value arises from the fact, (1) that the person making the satisfaction 
 is infinite God; (2) that the human nature from the personal union, 
 has become participant of divine and infinite majesty, and therefore its 
 passion and death are regarded and esteemed as of such infinite value 
 and price as though they belonged to the divine nature. Acts 20 : 28." 
 If men have merited eternal punishment, and Christ suffered only for a 
 short time, yet this was nevertheless still a sufficient atonement, inas- 
 much as the sufferings of Christ are of infinite value. Hutt. meets the 
 objection of the Photinians (Loc. Com., 427): " That the curse of the 
 law was eternal death ; but now, since Christ, did not undergo eternal 
 death, therefore he has not undergone or borne for us the curse of the 
 law," by saying; "The reasoning deceives through the sophism of 
 1 non causa pro causa.' For it is not true, that the merit of Christ is 
 not of infinite value, for the reason that Christ met a death that is not 
 eternal; for, as the sins of our disobedience are actually finite, yet in 
 guilt they are infinite, since they are committed against the infinite jus- 
 tice of God ; so the obedience and death of Christ were indeed finite in 
 act, so far as they were circumscribed by a period of fixed time, namely, 
 the days of humiliation, but they are infinite with respect to merit, in- 
 
366 SACERDOTAL OFFICE OF CHRIST. 
 
 asmuch as they proceed from an infinite person, namely, from the only 
 begotten Son of God himself. Secondly, it is not unconditionally true, 
 that the curse of the law is to be defined only by eternal death. For if 
 this were true, the Apostle's definition of the curse of the law, by the 
 declaration of Moses : ' Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree,' 
 Deut. 21 : 23, would have been extremely inaccurate. Then, eternal 
 death is defined not only by its perpetual continuance, or the enduring 
 of the tortures of hell, but also by the feeling of the sorrows of hell, 
 united with rejection or desertion by God ; so that he who even but for 
 a moment endures such sorrows, can be said to have experienced eternal 
 death. Thus Christ, indeed, not for a moment, or a short space of time, 
 but through the entire period of his humiliation, truly endured the feeling 
 of those sorrows of hell, so that at length he was constrained to exclaim, 
 i My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me ? ' But the reason that 
 he did not suffer death in the latter manner is, that he himself, as an in- 
 nocent man, by dying satisfied the law." Holl. (742) remarks : 
 " Christ endured a punishment equivalent to eternal punishment, inas- 
 much as he suffered the punishments of hell intensively as respects their 
 power, weight, and substance, although not extensively, so far as their 
 duration and the accidents pertaining to the subject's suffering are con- 
 cerned ; he bore the extremity, but not eternity of tortures." 
 
 [The students of the history of the doctrine of the "Active Obe- 
 dience," have occupied themselves too exclusively with polemical treati- 
 ses. In practical works its formulation is much earlier than 1553. It 
 is distinctly taught in the Third Homily of the Church of England 
 (Cranmer) of 1547, in the Articles for the Reformation of Cologne 
 (Melanchthon and Bucer) of 1543, and the Brandenburg-Niirnberg 
 Articles of 1533. What is especially interesting is, that this earliest 
 document was prepared by Andrew Osiander himself, with the assist- 
 ance of Brentz. Its presentation is as follows : 
 
 " This Mediator treated thus with God: First, he directed his entire 
 life to the will of the Father, did for us what we were under obligation to 
 do, and yet could not do; and fulfilled the law and all righteousness for 
 our good, Matt. 5: 17; Gal. 4: 4; 1 Cor. 1 : 30; Phil. 3: 9" {Active). "Sec- 
 ondly, he took upon himself all our sins, and bore and suffered all that 
 was due us, John 1 : 29 ; Is. 53 : 4-6 ; Rom. 8 : 32 ;" Gal. 3:13 (Passive). 
 
 Nowhere, in the whole range of Lutheran theology, are these two 
 forms of the obedience, more sharply discriminated, than in the above.] 
 
 [17] Quen. (Ill, 228): " The real* object for which satisfaction was 
 
 * In the sense of pertaining to things. 
 
REAL OBJECT OF SATISFACTION. 367 
 
 rendered is one thing ; the personal object is another. I. The real ob- 
 ject comprises (1) all sins whatever, original as well as actual, past as 
 well as future, venial as well as mortal, yea, even the very sin against 
 the Holy Ghost, Is. 53: 4, sq. ; Tit. 2 : 14 ; 1 John 1:7; Heb. 1 : 3 ; 1 
 John 2 :2. (2) All the penalties of our sins, temporal as well as eter- 
 nal, Is. 53 : 5 ; Gal. 3 : 13; Rom. 5:8,9; Heb. 2 : 14, 15 ; I Cor. 15 : 
 14." 
 
 [On the real object, Grh. VI, 306 : " 1. Scripture every where speaks 
 indefinitely when it treats of the satisfaction rendered for sins by Christ. 
 John 1 : 29 : "The sin of the world," i. e., sin understood univer- 
 sally, everything having the nature of sin. 2. Not only indefinitely but 
 also universally, Is. 53 : 6; Rom. 3 : 12 ; Tit. 2 : 14; 1 John 1:7. 3. 
 Species of actual sins are specified, Is. 53 : 6 ; Rom. 3:12; Heb. 9:14. 4. 
 Christ made satisfaction for every sin, which the Law accuses and exe- 
 crates. But the Law accuses and execrates all sins, not only original, 
 but also actual, Gal. 3 : 13 ; Deut. 27 : 5. 5. Had Christ made satisfac- 
 tion only for original sin, so that it would be left us to make satisfaction 
 for actual sins, only one part of the work of redemption would be left to 
 Christ, while the other, and that, too, the greater part, would be trans- 
 ferred to men. For Christ's satisfaction would be for but one sin, while 
 men would have to render satisfaction for many sins. But Scripture 
 ascribes the entire work of redemption to Christ, 1 Tim. 2:5 ; Is. 63:3; 
 Heb. 10 : 14. Christ however made full satisfaction not only for actual 
 sins, but also for the temporal and eternal punishments due our sins : 1. 
 According to the nature of a perpetual relation, when the guilt is re- 
 moved, the debt of punishment belonging to the guilt is also removed. 
 But Christ took upon himself our sins, Is. 53 : 6 ; John 1 : 29 ; 1 Pet. 2 : 
 24. Therefore, he also transferred to himself the penalty due our sins, 
 and consequently freed us from the debt of the penalty that was to be paid. 
 2. Scripture emphatically says that the punishment due our sins was 
 imposed on Christ, Is. 53 : 5. 3. All punishments, temporal and eter- 
 nal, corporeal and spiritual, are included under the name ' curse,' Gal. 3 : 
 13. One punishment of sin is the curse of the Law ; but ' Christ hath 
 redeemed us from the curse of the Law.' Another punishment of sin 
 is the dominion of Satan ; but Christ has delivered us from the domin- 
 ion of Satan, Heb. 2:14. Another punishment of sin is the wrath of 
 God ; but Christ has delivered us from the wrath to come, 1 Thess. 1 : 
 10. Another punishment is death ; but Christ has delivered us from 
 death, Hos. 13: 14. Another is hell and eternal damnation ; but Christ 
 has delivered us from hell and eternal damnation, Rom. 8:1. 4. God's 
 justice does not allow the same sin to be punished twice ; and he has 
 
368 SACERDOTAL OFFICE OF CHRIST. 
 
 " bruised" his most beloved Son for our offenses, Is. 53 : 4. Therefore 
 he will not punish them in those who have become partakers of the sat- 
 isfaction rendered by Christ. 5. If we had still to to render satisfaction 
 as to the penalties of sin, the satisfaction of Christ would not yet be per- 
 fect, the work of redemption would not yet be complete, all things would 
 not yet be finished by Him. And yet he cried on the cross, 'It is fin- 
 ished,' from which Heb. 10 :14 infers, etc. Had he made satisfaction 
 for original sin alone, or for guilt alone, it would be better called 
 flliiAvrpuoig- than cnro^ivrpoxytc. 
 
 That, by faith, men become partakers of the most perfect satisfaction 
 rendered by Christ, we prove by the following arguments : 
 
 1. Scripture describes our reconciliation with God to be such that 
 God no longer remembers our sins, Jer. 31 : 34, but casts them behind 
 our backs, Is. 38 : 17, blots them out like a cloud, Is. 44: 22, casts them 
 into the depths of the sea, Mic. 7 : 19, does not impute, but covers them, 
 Ps. 32 : 1. Therefore he does not hold the reconciled to the reckoning, 
 or exact, of them, punishments. For were God still to punish, he 
 would still impute ; were he to avenge, he would still remember ; were 
 he to account, he could not keep covered ; were he to examine, he could 
 not cast away ; were he to inspect, he could not blot out. 
 
 2. The complete forgiveness of sins is inconsistent with a debt of 
 satisfaction yet to be rendered for the punishment. That for which a 
 satisfaction is still exacted is not yet completely forgiven. No one would 
 say that a creditor who still demands a satisfaction, had forgiven a 
 debtor. When all the debt is forgiven, the obligation to pay even the 
 least part is removed, etc. 
 
 The contrary doctrines are the various opinions of the Scholastics 
 and Papists : (a) That " we can make satisfaction for our guilt ;" (b) 
 that while " we cannot make satisfaction for our guilt, we can for the pen- 
 alty ; " (c) that "eternal punishment is, by the power of the keys, com- 
 muted to temporal punishment, so as to bring it within our ability;" 
 (d) that "while eternal guilt and punishment are remitted, the obligation 
 to some temporal punishment remains." Thus Bonaventura: " In sin- 
 ning, the sinner binds himself to eternal punishment. Divine mercy, 
 in justifying, remits all the guilt and subjection to eternal punishment. 
 But since mercy cannot prejudice justice, whose office it is to punish 
 what is wicked, it releases in such way that he remains under subjection 
 to only a relatively small amount of temporal punishment." 
 
 In the controversy, the very practical question arose as to how then 
 we are to regard the temporal afflictions of the justified. These, the 
 Papists argued, were a fulfilment of the obligation of punishment, and 
 
PERSONAL OBJECT OF SATISFACTION. 369 
 
 thus satisfactions. The Lutherans, especially Chemnitz in his Examen, 
 "De Satisfaction, " maintained that, properly speaking, they were not 
 punishments, but chastisements. "What before forgiveness were pun- 
 ishments of sinners, after forgiveness became the contests and exercises 
 of the justified " (Chrysostom in Gerhard). Gerh. (VI, 319) : "The 
 former are indications, testifying that the person afflicted is under the 
 wrath of God ; the latter proceed not from an enraged, but from a.pro- 
 pitious God, Lam. 3 : 33. The former are testimonies, aye, beginnings 
 of eternal punishment ; the latter look towards the reformation and sal- 
 vation of the godly. Where there is remission of sins, there punish- 
 ment properly so called cannot occur ; for what else is remission of sins, 
 but forgiveness from punishment?"] 
 
 II. (Quen., Ill, 238) : " The personal object comprises (not angels, 
 but) each and every sinful man, without any exception whatever. For 
 he suffered and died for all, according to the serious and sincere good 
 pleasure and kind intention of himself and God the Father, according 
 to which he truly wills the salvation of each and every soul, even of 
 those who fail of salvation ; not Kara 66^av (in appearance), but K ar' 
 a?if/&eiav (in truth), i. e., not in imagination or conjecture, but in very 
 deed, and most truly, Is. 53 : 6 ; Matt. 20: 28; 2 Cor. 5: 14, 15; Heb. 
 2: 9; 1 Tim. 2: 6; John 1: 29; 1 John 2: 1, 2; Rom. 14: 15; 1 Cor. 
 8: 11; Heb. 6 : 4-6 ; 2 Pet. 2: 1." 
 
 [On the personal object : 
 
 Grh., IV, 178 : " If the reprobate are condemned because they do 
 not believe in the Son of God, it follows that to them also the passion 
 and death of Christ pertain. For, otherwise, they could not be con- 
 demned for their contempt of that which, according to the divine de- 
 cree, does not pertain to them. The former is distinctly affirmed, John 
 3: 18, 36; 16 : 9. If Christ had not made satisfaction for the sins of 
 unbelievers, it follows that they are condemned for the very reason that 
 they are unwilling to believe that that pertains to them, which in truth, 
 and according to God's immutable decree, does not pertain to them. I 
 add also this argument: To whomsoever God offers benefits acquired by 
 the passion and death of Christ, for them also Christ has died. For 
 far be it from us to ascribe to God such dissembling as though by his 
 Word he would call the unbelieving to repentance and the kingdom of 
 Christ, whom nevertheless he would exclude therefrom by an absolute 
 decree. But both Scripture and experience testify that God has 
 offered and still is offering his Word and sacraments to some reprobate 
 and condemned, and, in these means, also the blessings acquired by the 
 passion and death of Christ." 
 
370 SACERDOTAL OFFICE OF CHRIST. 
 
 He next shows how the Calvinists have attached another sense to the 
 Scholastic axiom, which they have adopted : " Christ died sufficiently, 
 but not efficiently for all." The Scholastics meant by this, that Christ 
 potentially saved all, and that the reason that all do not partake of his 
 grace, must be found in their own guilt, in not accepting him by faith. 
 The Calvinists, on the other hand, understand by it that Christ's death 
 would not be without the power to expiate the sins of all, if it had been 
 destined by God for this end, but that such was not his purpose. 
 
 " The former refer the cause of the inefficiency to the men them- 
 selves ; by the latter, it is referred to the decree of God." 
 
 The chief arguments in opposition to the universality of the satisfac- 
 tion are recounted : 
 
 1. u Christ says, that he lays down his life for his sheep, John 10 : 
 15, sanctifies himself for those given him of his Father, John 17 : 19, 
 his blood is given for many, Matt. 26 : 28. Christ, therefore, has died 
 only for the elect." But (a) the force of such argument is : Christ 
 died for. his sheep. Therefore, for his sheep alone. He died for the 
 elect; therefore, only for the elect, (b) The particular is included in 
 its universal, viz., that Christ died for all ; hence the universal ought 
 not to be limited by the particular, but the particular extended by its 
 universal, (c) The word " many " is frequently used in Scripture for 
 all, Ps. 97 : 1 ; Dan. 12 : 2 ; Rom. 5: 19. Hence the argument: 
 " Christ died for many ; and, therefore, not for all," is invalid, (d) 
 In these passages " many" must necessarily be understood of the whole 
 multitude of men. This is shown by the opposition in the argument of 
 Rom. 5:19. For all who were rendered sinners by Adam's fall, the 
 benefit of righteousness has been acquired. Cf. Is, 53 : 12 with v. 6; 
 also Matt. 20.: 28, with 1 Tim. 2 : 6. (e) Scripture speaks in accord- 
 ance with the double relation of Christ's merit; it is universal, if con- 
 sidered apart from its application ; but its application and actual enjoy- 
 ment is, by man's fault, rendered particular. 
 
 2. " If Christ truly died for all, the effect and fruit of his death must 
 pertain to all." But (a) That alms be received, there must be not 
 only a hand to give, but also a hand to take. It is not enough that the 
 benefits of Christ, acquired by his death, are offered ; they must also 
 be received by faith, (b) This faith God ordinarily enkindles in the 
 heart through the Holy Spirit, working in Word and sacraments ; but 
 they who repel the Word, and resist the Spirit, are, by their own fault, 
 deprived of the benefits of Christ's death, (c) This is clearly shown 
 from 2 Cor. 5 ; 18, 19 : " God hath reconciled us to himself," etc., i. e., 
 reconciliation has been made, viz., with respect to the acquiring of the 
 
PERSONAL OBJECT OF SATISFACTION. 371 
 
 benefit by Christ's death, and yet v. 18 : " God hath given to us the 
 ministry of reconciliation ;" v. 20, " We pray you, be ye reconciled ;" 
 i. e., reconciliation is still to he made, viz., with respect to its applica- 
 tion, (d) The argument rests on the hypothesis that the death of 
 Christ does not belong to those, who do not partake of its fruit. Were 
 then Paul, the thief on the cross, and others, as long as they were un- 
 believing and impenitent, excluded from the number of those, for whom 
 Christ died ? If this be denied, the universality of the proposition falls ; 
 if it be affirmed, it follows that in conversion, the justified are either 
 without the death of Christ, or that only then does Christ die for them. 
 (<?) This may be illustrated by an example : A hundred Christian cap- 
 tives are in bondage to the Turkish Emperor. A Christian prince 
 pays a certain sum for the ransom of all. If any afterwards prefer to 
 remain longer in captivity rather than enjoy the liberty acquired and 
 offered them, they should ascribe this to themselves. For the univer- 
 sality of the ransom, is not thereby invalidated. 
 
 8. " Christ made no satisfaction for those, for whom he does not pray, 
 But he does not pray for the reprobate, John 17 : 9." But, while it is 
 true, that the satisfaction of Christ is not for those, for whom he 
 absolutely does not pray, this cannot be said of the reprobate, Is. 53 : 
 12 ; Luke 23 : 34. A distinction must be drawn between the general 
 and the special intercession ; also between the office of Christ, as a priest 
 and as a prophet; as a priest, praying for all, when on the altar of the 
 cross he offered his body as a sacrifice for the sins of the whole world ; 
 but as a prophet, proclaiming that sins are retained against sinners im- 
 penitent and resisting. 
 
 4. " That for which there could have been no use, we must not be- 
 lieve to have been done by God. But there would be no use of a uni- 
 versal merit, since some of the reprobate for whom Christ would have 
 then suffered were already in hell." With equal reason we could con- 
 clude that Christ did not suffer for Abraham, Isaac, and the other saints 
 of the Old Testament, since they had already attained that which is 
 said to come through Christ's passion. We should rather say, ac- 
 cording to Rev. 13: 8, that the Lamb of God was slain from the found- 
 ation of the world, viz., with respect to the divine decree, the promise, 
 the types in the sacrifices, and the efficacy ; and that the fruit of Christ's 
 passion is not to be restricted to the moment of time in which it occurred, 
 but extended to both past and future, whence the ancients said that 
 " Christ's passion was before it was." We, therefore, are right in say- 
 ing that Christ suffered and died also for those who, while he was suf- 
 fering, were in hell, not as though Christ, by his suffering, would liber- 
 
372 SACERDOTAL OFFICE OF CHRIST. 
 
 ate them from hell, but because while they were still living, the promises 
 concerning the Messiah ought to have been embraced, and the merits of 
 his passion thus received, as patriarchs, prophets, and the rest of the 
 godly under the Old Testament, were saved by faith in Christ.] 
 
 [18] Quen. (Ill, 253): Satisfaction is an act of the sacerdotal office of 
 Christ, the God-man, according to which, from the eternal decree of the 
 triune God, out of his immense mercy, he cheerfully and voluntarily 
 substituted himself as the bondsman and surety for the entire human 
 race, which, through sin, had been cast into incredible misery ; and, hav- 
 ing taken upon himself each and every sin of the entire world, by his 
 most perfect obedience and the suffering, in their place, of the penalties 
 that men had merited, made satisfaction, on this earth, during the whole 
 time of his humiliation, and especially in his last agony, to the Holy 
 Trinity that had been most grievously offended ; and, by thus making a 
 satisfaction, acquired and earned for each and every man the remission 
 of all sins, exemption from all sins, grace and peace with God, eternal 
 righteousness and salvation." 
 
 [19] Concerning the relation of satisfaction and merit, Holl. (736) : 
 "(1) Satisfaction precedes, merit follows; for Christ has merited right- 
 eousness and life eternal by rendering a satisfaction. (2) Satisfaction 
 is made to God and his justice; but Christ has merited salvation, not 
 for God, but for us. (3) Merit precedes the order for the payment of 
 a price ; satisfaction for the compensating of an injury. Therefore, by 
 his satisfaction, Christ made a compensation for the injury offered to 
 God, expiated iniquity, paid the debt, and freed us from eternal penal- 
 ties; but, by his merit, he acquired for us eternal righteousness and sal- 
 vation. (4) The satisfaction rendered by Christ is the payment of our 
 debts, by which we were under obligations to God ; but merit arises 
 from the fulfilment of the law and the suffering that is not due." The 
 entire obedience which Christ rendered avails for us, and Christ did not 
 need to merit anything for his own person. This the Dogmaticians ex- 
 press in the following manner: " Christ, as a man, merited nothing for 
 himself by his obedience; because, through the personal union, Christ 
 was given all the fulness of the Godhead (Col. 2: 9), and was anointed 
 with the oil of joy (the gifts of the Holy Ghost) above his fellows (Ps. 
 45: 7). Therefore, it was not necessary that he should merit anything 
 for himself." (Holl. (749) ). 
 
 [20] Conf. Aug, (XXI, 2) : " The Scripture propoundeth unto us 
 one Christ, the mediator, propitiatory, high priest, and intercessor." 
 Ap. Conf. (Ill, 44) : " Christ who sitteth at the right hand of the 
 Father, and perpetually maketh intercession for us." 
 
INTERCESSION. 373 
 
 Quen. (Ill, 254): "Of this priestly act in the type, we may read in 
 Lev. 16: 17, 18; Ex. 28: 29, 35. Christ the God-man, is our only 
 intercessor, 1 Tim., 2: 5." (257): "The ground of this intercession 
 is the satisfaction and universal merit of the interceder himself; for by 
 and through his bloody satisfaction, or, by the virtue of his merit, 
 Christ, as a priest, intercedes for us with God the Father." A more 
 specific explanation of intercession, in the following (ib.) : "By the 
 virtue of his merit, Christ truly and formally intercedes for all men, not 
 indeed by acquiring anew for them grace and divine favor, but only ac- 
 cording to the mode of his present state, which is that of exaltation, by 
 seeking that the acquired blessing may be applied to them for righteous- 
 ness and salvation." Grh. : "Intercession is nothing else than the 
 application and continual force as it were of redemption, perpetually 
 winning favor with God." 
 
 [21] Quen. (Ill, 256) : " He does not indeed intercede for those 
 who, having died in impenitence, are in hell, suffering eternal punish- 
 ments (for he is not their intercessor, but the judge condemning and 
 punishing them), but in general for all those who still live in the world, 
 and still have the gate of divine grace lying open before them, whether 
 they be elect or reprobate. For he interceded for the transgressors or 
 his crucifiers, Is. 53: 12; Luke 23: 34." Holl. (750): "How he 
 prays for the elect, we read, John 17: 11. From which is inferred that 
 Christ intercedes for the regenerate and elect, that they may be pre- 
 served from evil, be kept in the unity of faith, and be sanctified more 
 and more by the word of truth." Quen. (Ill, 257): "It is evident 
 that Christ justly does not ask the peculiar blessings that have been re- 
 counted, the actual, saving enjoyment of which belongs to the faithful 
 and godly alone, for the ungrateful, wicked, and refractory world, in so 
 far as it is and remains such, since it is incapable of these. These 
 special blessings, Christ has not sought for such a world, by no means 
 out of any absolute hatred against it, . . . but because of its wicked- 
 ness, ingratitude, and contumacy. . . . The Saviour, therefore, in his 
 prayers, does not commend to the Father the inflexible despisers and 
 violent persecutors of the Gospel, but his own beloved disciples who 
 received his Word ; yet that this does not absolutely exclude the world 
 either from his satisfaction or intercession, is evident from John 17: 
 21." 
 
 [22] Holl. (749) : " The intercession of Christ is not merely inter- 
 pretative through the exhibition of his merits" ("as though Christ in- 
 tercedes for us not by prayers, but by his merit alone, and its eternal 
 efficacy" (Quen. Ill, 257) ), "for the word hrvyxdveiv, Rom. 8: 34; 
 
374 SACERDOTAL OFFICE OF CHRIST. 
 
 Heb. 7 : 25, employed concerning the intercession of Christ, means 
 more than the real, indeed, yet silent presentation of merits. . . . 
 Therefore, the intercession of Christ is not only real, but also vocal and 
 oral ; not abject by submission " (" as though Christ, as a suppliant 
 with bent knees and outstretched hands, and a vocal lamentation, would 
 entreat the Father, for such an entreaty conflicts with Christ's glorious 
 state ; therefore we must regard it deoTrpeTzug- [in a manner becoming 
 God] (John 17 : 24, (and not capnuiug or dovlmug [after the manner of 
 the flesh or of a servant] " (Quen. Ill, 257) ), "but is expiatory and 
 effectual for obtaining saving blessings for men (because whatever he 
 asks of his Father is pleasing and agreeable to the Father, John 11: 
 22). The intercession of Christ is effectual to obtain for us salvation, 
 although those who do not believe in Christ, do not enjoy the effect. 
 Hence, it is said to be effectual, by reason of the saving intention of 
 Christ, and not by reason of the result in the unbelieving and wicked." 
 But Br. observes, in regard to the verbal intercession (498) : "Whether 
 this intercession be verbal, and consist in this, that, by the virtue of his 
 merit and satisfaction formerly rendered, and of his prayers formerly 
 made, Christ moves God to remit our sins? it is not necessary to deter- 
 mine." [Quen. (Ill, 271) : " Elegantly has St. Augustine on Ps. 
 85, said : ' He prays for us, as our Priest; he prays in us, as our Head; 
 he is prayed to by us, as our God. Let us, then, recognize our voices 
 in him, and his voices in us."] 
 
 [23] Quen. (Ill, 258) : " This intercession will not be terminated 
 by the end of the world, but will continue to all eternity, Heb. 7 : 25 ; 
 Ps. 110 : 4 ; Heb. 5:6; 7 : 17. For it must not be thought that after 
 the end of the world, when the elect have passed into life eternal, inter- 
 cession is superfluous ; for he prays and intercedes, not that they may 
 not by sin fall from eternal salvation, but that they may be kept in glory, 
 which, as it must be regarded as having been received for merit, must 
 also be regarded as having been received for Christ's meritorious inter- 
 cession." 
 
 As in Rom. 8 : 26, mention is made of an intercession by the Holy 
 Spirit also, some of the Dogmaticians inquire what is to be understood 
 by this, and how it differs from the intercession that is offered by Christ. 
 Quen. (Ill, 259) : " Some receive vTcepevTvyxaveiv by metalepsis and with 
 respect to the result, so that he is said to pray and groan, because he 
 causes us to pray and groan, shows and teaches us for what to pray and 
 how to pray aright, and forms our prayers within us. But others also 
 understand it literally as referring to the very person of the Holy Ghost, 
 viz., that the Holy Ghost himself, in his own person, prays and inter- 
 
REDEMPTION. 375 
 
 cedes for us." Quen. decides for the former interpretation. And he 
 thus states the difference between the two kinds of intercession : " The 
 one intercession (that of Christ) is deavdpamKJ} [that of the God-man] ; 
 the other is purely Oeua) [divine]. The one is mediatorial, the other is 
 not. The intercession of Christ is founded upon his suffering and 
 death, which cannot be said of the intercession of the Holy Ghost" 
 (lb. 260). 
 
 [24] Hole. (751): "Redemption is not simple, absolute, and meta- 
 phorical, but precious, satisfactory, and literal, 1 Cor. 6 : 19, 20; 1 Pet. 
 1 : 18; Matt. 20 : 28; 1 Tim. 2: 6." Id. (752) : " The former is lib- 
 eration without any intervening price, from a penalty that has been 
 decided, the latter is that by which a guilty person is redeemed from his 
 crime and the punishment, by the payment of a price. . . . For, prop- 
 erly speaking, to redeem signifies to buy again, just as the Greek words 
 Ivrpovv, ayop&friv, e^ayopd^eiv, and the Hebrew words. ITT3' ^NJh denote 
 purchase or repurchase, which occurs through an intervening price. 
 Therefore, when, in the present argument, where we treat of the re- 
 demption of the human race, having fallen into sin, that has been ren- 
 dered by Christ, the same Hebrew and Greek words in the holy volume 
 are employed, we receive them in a literal sense, because no necessity 
 appears to be imposed upon us of departing from the literal sense." 
 
 The expressions in Holy Scripture to denote redemption are, (a) in 
 the Old Testament ff?^ Lev. 25 : 24, 26, 29, 31, 32, 48, 51,52; \Y1Q> 
 Ex. 21: 30; Ps. 49 : 8 ; (6) in the New Testament, Mrpooig, Luke 1 : 
 68 ; 2 : 38 ; Heb. 9 : 12 ; faoTifrrpatru;, Luke 21 : 28 ; Rom. 3 : 24; 8 : 23 ; 
 1 Cor. 1 : 30 ; Eph. 1 : 7, 14 ; 4 : 30 ; Col. 1:14; Heb. 9 : 15 ; 11 : 35 ; 
 aydpaccQ, 2 Pet. 2:1; Rev. 5:9; 14:3; k^ayopaatg, Gal. 3 : 13 ; 4 : 5. 
 
 \_'2o^\ The Dogmaticians Koenig, Quenstedt, and Hollazius, 
 treat still more fully of redemption, while they distinguish: (1) The 
 captive (the whole human race). (2) The one holding the captive 
 (God, Rom. 11: 32; Gal. 3: 22, to whom the ransom must be paid, 
 and the devil who holds the wicked in the snares of sins, 2 Tim. 2: 26 ; 
 to whom not a price but punishment is due). (3) The one redeeming 
 the captive (Christ, the only and the universal Redeemer of the whole 
 human race, availing by the right, strength, and will to redeem, Rom. 
 3: 24). (4) The chains from which Christ redeemed the human race 
 (sins, offences against God, and temporal and eternal punishments). 
 (5) The means of redemption. (6) The end of redemption (the final 
 end, the glory of God; the intermediate, freedom from the guilt and 
 dominion of sin). As, however, all the matters discussed under these 
 heads have been included in the previous discussion, their further cita- 
 
376 REGAL OFFICE OF CHRIST. 
 
 tion could be dispensed with, and their presentation by the Dogmatic- 
 ians above named is to be regarded as a mere recapitulation of what had 
 been given before. 
 
 § 37. The Regal Office. 
 
 To him, who announces to the world God's gracious purpose 
 of redemption, and who himself accomplishes the redemption, 
 the dominion over the world is committed ; and, in exercising 
 this dominion, he performs a regal function. This regal dignity 
 belongs to Christ, as God, from eternity : but from the moment 
 of his incarnation his humanity also participated in it. [1] Yet, 
 as long as he tarried here upon earth, he did not exercise this 
 regal dominion in its full extent ; but rather, as long as he was 
 in the state of humiliation, refrained, for the most part, from its 
 use and exercise, and not until the time of his exaltation, and 
 thereafter, did he enter upon the complete exercise of this his regal 
 dominion. [2] Inasmuch as Christ is thus King and Lord of the 
 world, his dominion extends over everything that is in the world 
 and belongs to it ; and there appertains to him not only the pres- 
 ervation and government of the world in general, but also the 
 preservation and government of the Church in particular. At 
 the same time, this his dominion extends not only over the pres- 
 ent, but equally also over the future world. This kingdom of 
 Christ is, in itself, only one, and embraces the whole world, the 
 present and the future, with all that it contains. Yet this one 
 kingdom can also be distinguished as a threefold one, in the same 
 sense in which we distinguish at present the world and the 
 Church, and in which we distinguish the citizens of this and of 
 the future life, of heaven and of earth. Accordingly, the world 
 and the Church, in this life, are regarded as each a special king- 
 dom, over which Christ .rules, and those who are in the life to 
 come, constitute the third kingdom. This threefold kingdom is 
 designated as the kingdom of power, of grace, and of glory. The 
 first is called the kingdom of power •, because it is the kingdom in 
 which Christ exercises his divine power by governing and up- 
 holding the world ; the second is called the kingdom of grace, 
 because in this Christ operates through his saving grace; the 
 third is called the kingdom of glory, because he therein unfolds, 
 
NOT FULLY EXERCISED IN HIS HUMILIATION. 877 
 
 in all its perfection, his divine glory before the eyes of all who 
 are there assembled. [3] 
 
 The regal office is accordingly defined as, " The theanthropic 
 function of Christ, whereby he divinely controls and governs, 
 according to both natures, the divine and the human (and the 
 latter, as exalted to the right hand of Majesty), all creatures 
 whatever, in the kingdom of power, grace, and glory, by infinite 
 majesty and power; as to the divinity, by virtue of eternal gen- 
 eration ; as to the assumed humanity, by virtue of the personal 
 union belonging to him." (Quen., III. 264.) [4] 
 
 To the " kingdom of power (in which Christ powerfully rules 
 over this universe, and upholds it and. providentially governs it)" 
 belong all creatures in the world, visible and invisible ; [5] 
 Christ's dominion extends over them all, and all must be subject 
 unto him. By him everything is upheld and governed. [6] 
 
 To the " kingdom of grace (in which Christ collects the Church 
 militant upon earth, governs it, furnishes it with spiritual gifts, 
 preserves and defends it, to the praise of the divine name, to the 
 destruction of Satan's kingdom, and the salvation of believers, 
 Holl., 763; Jer. 23: 5; 33: 15; Zech. 9:9)" belong those who 
 believe in Christ, the members of his Church. To enlarge this 
 Church, and to bestow upon its members all the blessings of the 
 Gospel, is the regal function which Christ exercises in this king- 
 dom, [7] and the Word and Sacraments are the means which he 
 uses for that purpose. [8] This kingdom will, it is true, come to 
 an end in this world, but only by passing over into the kingdom 
 of glory. [9] 
 
 To the "kingdom of glory, finally (in which Christ most glori- 
 ously rules the Church triumphant in heaven, and fills it with 
 eternal felicity, to the praise of the divine name and the eternal 
 refreshment of the saved, Matt. 25: 34; John 17: 24;. Holl., 
 763)," belong all the inhabitants of heaven, the good angels and 
 redeemed men: they behold the Lord in his glory, as he shows 
 himself to the dead, when he awakens them to life. [10] This 
 glory of the Lord begins with the time of his ascension to heaven, 
 but will not be perfectly unfolded until, after the final judgment, 
 believers also will enter into the kingdom of his glory, to share 
 with him in its possession. Matt. 25 : 34. [11] 
 25 
 
378 REGAL OFFICE OF CHRIST. 
 
 [1] Quen. (Ill, 260): "Just as Christ, in his prophetic and sacer- 
 dotal offices, acts and works according to both natures, so also, accord- 
 ing to both natures, in this regal office, he acts and performs his part ; 
 for he rules over all creatures, not only as God, according to his di- 
 vinity, but also as man, according to his exalted humanity." The 
 Holy Scriptures speak of a regal dignity in Ps. 2: 6; 20: 9; 45: 1, 
 3, 5 ; 47 : 7 ; Heb. 2 : 7, 8 ; Ps. 8 : 6 ; 97 : 5 ; 2 Sam. 23 : 3 ; 1 Tim. 
 6: 15; Rev. 17: 14; 19: 16. 
 
 Quen. further remarks (III, 261) : " One in number is that regal 
 power that Christ, according to his divine nature, has, and according to 
 his human nature, possesses ; only the mode of having it varies ; for 
 what, according to his divinity, he has by eternal generation from eter- 
 nity, that, according to his humanity, through and because of the per- 
 sonal union, he has received in time, and fully exercises now in the state 
 of exaltation." His power to rule, even according to his human nature, 
 is evident from Ps. 8:6; Jer. 23 : 5 ; John 17:5. 
 
 [2] Holl. (764) : " Christ immediately, in his very conception, was 
 anointed to a regal dignity, and, during his visible intercourse upon the 
 earth, possessed the power to rule, and sometimes exercised it according 
 to his pleasure. But, in the state of humiliation, he voluntarily refrained 
 from the most full' and uninterrupted employment of his rule." Christ, 
 therefore, " during that time in which he visibly dwelt on this earth, 
 was a true King. Luke 2 : 11 ; 19 : 35 ; Mark 14: 61. There is an 
 antitheses of the Socinians, who say that Christ, before his resurrection, 
 was not actually a King; although they do not deny that, before his 
 death, he was described as a King." (Holl., 764.) Quen. (Ill, 264) : 
 " A distinction must, therefore, here be made between the appointment 
 to this regal office and the refraining from the full administration and 
 use of the same. Christ, as man, was King and-- Lord even in the 
 womb (Luke 1 : 43), in the manger (Luke 2 : 11), in bonds (John 18 : 
 37), on the cross (Luke 23 : 42), and yet did not actually exercise that 
 dominion." That Christ also possessed regal power in the state of 
 humiliation, the Dogmaticians regard as proved by his performing 
 miracles. 
 
 [3] Even Hutt. and Hfrffr. still account, as belonging to the regal 
 office, only his dominion over believers ; and Grh., who was contem- 
 poraneous with them, was the first to include under the regal office all 
 the relations in which Christ is Lord and King, and in this they were 
 imitated by all the later Dogmaticians. Of course, no doctrinal differ- 
 ence was hereby intended. The faith of the Church always was, that 
 Christ was Lord and King of the world. Thus we have it stated, e. g., 
 
THE KINGDOM OF POWER, GRACE AND GLORY. 379 
 
 by Chmn. (De Duab. Naturis, 205) : " Scripture clearly affirms thai to 
 Christ, even according to his humanity, as Lord, all things have been 
 made subject, not only in the Church, but all things in general ; . . . 
 and distinct and express mention is made of the beasts of the field, the 
 fowls of the air, the fish of the sea, and all the works of God's hands, 
 whether they be in heaven, or on earth, or under the earth, even of the 
 enemies of Christ, and therefore the devil and death itself, as being in 
 this subjection." The difference is only this, that Grh. was the first 
 to introduce the method of arranging under one head all that is to be 
 said concerning the dominion of Christ. 
 
 As to the division itself. Grh. (Ill, 578) : " The kingdom of 
 Christ is considered either in this or the future life. In this life, it is 
 called the kingdom of power or grace ; . . .in the life to come, it is 
 called the kingdom of glory." Br. (498) : " The regal office of Christ 
 is threefold, according to the diverse nature of those whom Christ re- 
 gards as his subjects, and governs diversely. For although, if you 
 regard the words themselves, the kingdom of grace, as well as that of 
 glory, may seem to be comprised under the kingdom of power, as both 
 truly depend upon divine power imparted to the human nature of Christ, 
 yet the ksks loquendi requires it to be named the kingdom of grace, with 
 respect to the spiritual blessings which are conferred in this world, and 
 the kingdom of glory, with respect to the glory of the future world ; but 
 the kingdom of power signifies a universal government." Quex. (Ill, 
 264) : " Some say that Christ reigns in the world by power, in the 
 Church by grace, in heaven by glory, and in hell by justice." In re- 
 gard to the last, Holl. observes (763) : " You say, that ' also a fourth 
 kingdom of Christ is mentioned, viz., the kingdom of justice over the 
 wicked angels and condemned men.' Reply ; ^Ve refer the kingdom 
 of justice to the kingdom of power." On the other hand, Br. (501) : 
 " Some, referring both (the kingdom of glory and the kingdom of jus- 
 tice) to the same kingdom of glory, say that the glorifying of the elect 
 belongs by itself to the former ; but the condemnation of the wicked 
 . . . they refer to the latter in the manner in which under other cir- 
 cumstances opposites are wont to be referred to the same faculty." 
 
 The threefold division is, accordingly, not to be understood as if there 
 were three separate kingdoms over which Christ rules, but the reason 
 of the division lies partly in the different divine influences which Christ 
 exerts ; so that, therefore, the same that are in the kingdom of grace 
 are also in the kingdom of power; but in the one the divine saving 
 grace, and in the other the divine power, is exercised : partly, also, the 
 reason of the division lies in the difference of the places in which they 
 
380 REGAL OFFICE OF CHRIST. 
 
 are found, over which Christ rules, viz., in the one case upon earth and 
 in the other in heaven. 
 
 Quen. (Ill, 264): "The kingdom of grace includes, or rather pre- 
 supposes, the kingdom of power ; for the kingdom of power also is re- 
 quired for the kingdom of grace, or the church, which in this world is 
 to be established and ruled through the ministry of the Spirit by means 
 of the Word and sacraments," etc. 
 
 [4] Grh. (Ill, 578) : " The regal office is that according to which 
 Christ as the God-man governs all things in heaven and earth, and 
 especially protects his church against enemies." On the other hand, 
 Hfrffr. (353) (see note 3) : " The regal office is that according to 
 which, to the end of the world, through the ministry of the Word, he 
 collects his citizens, and, having furnished them with eminent gifts, vig- 
 orously defends them against enemies (in whose midst he rules), and at 
 length crowns them with eternal glory and honor." 
 
 [5] Quen. (Ill, 265) : " The object or matter with which this gov- 
 ernment is occupied comprises all the works of God in general, or all 
 creatures, visible, invisible, corporeal, incorporeal, animate, inanimate, 
 rational, irrational. Ps. 8 : 6, 7, 8 ; 1 Cor. 15: 27, 28 ; Heb. 2 : 7, 8; 
 Eph. 1 : 21, 22 ; 1 Pet. 3 : 22." 
 
 [6] Grh. (Ill, 578): "The kingdom of power is the general do- 
 minion over all things, or the governing of heaven and earth, Ps. 8:6; 
 Dan. 7:14; Matt. 28 : 18; Eph. 1 : 21 ; the subjugation of all creatures, 
 1 Cor. 15 : 27 ; Eph. 1 : 20 ; Heb. 2:8; dominion in the midst of his 
 enemies, whom he suppresses, restrains, and punishes, Ps. 2: 9 ; 110: 
 2; 1 Cor. 15: 25." 
 
 [7] Holl. (763) : " The subjects, in this kingdom of grace, are all 
 believing men, who constitute the church militant. The regal acts are 
 the collecting, governing, adorning, and preservation of the Church, his 
 defence of it against the enemies of grace, and his ruling in their midst. 
 John 3 : 5 ; 17 : 17 : Eph. 5 : 26 ; Tit. 3:5; Matt. 28 : 20." When 
 Quen. (Ill, 268), on the other hand, says ; u The object of the king- 
 dom of grace, according to the antecedent will, comprises all men uni- 
 versally, but the godly and believing especially," he means to say only 
 that participation in the blessings of the Church is intended for, and 
 sincerely offered to all men, and therefore does not contradict the state- 
 of Holl. 
 
 [8] Quen. (Ill, 267) :*"The Word and sacraments are the instru- 
 mental cause, for it pleased the King in Zion, Ps. 2 : 6, to act here or- 
 dinarily in no other way than by the Word and sacraments, and by 
 these means to collect, increase, and preserve on this earth a church for 
 himself. Matt. 4 : 23 ; 9 : 35 ; 24 : 14." 
 
THE DELIVERY OF THE KINGDOM. 381 
 
 [9] Quex. (Ill, 270): "The end of the world will indeed terminate 
 the mode of the kingdom of grace, but not the essence of the kingdom. 
 That which is said in 1 Cor. 15: 24, concerning the giving up of this 
 kingdom, is to be understood, not as applying to the government itself, 
 but only to the mode of governing, and the form and quality of the gov- 
 ernment, because Christ will govern no longer through means, namely, 
 through the Word and sacraments, through the cross and among enemies, 
 as before ; but, all enemies being put down, the last enemy, viz., death, 
 being destroyed, and the wicked being cast into hell, he will deliver the 
 kingdom to God the Father, i. e., he will hand over the captive ene- 
 mies and establish the elect, among whom he holds his spiritual king- 
 dom. Therefore thpre will be a triumphal handing over of subjugated 
 enemies, and a presentation of liberated believers. By this act of hand- 
 ing over, Christ will not lay aside the administration of his spiritual 
 and heavenly kingdom, but will then only enter upon another mode of 
 ruling in his government." [Quen. then quotes approvingly Dor- 
 schaeus: "This handing over will be not actus depositiom's, sed proposi- 
 tionis. Christ will not, at the consummation, lay down the kingdom, 
 which, up to the consummation, he has governed in grace and in glory; 
 but he will present it to God the Father for his inspection and glory. 
 Just as a general, after having destroyed all his enemies, presents to the 
 king, who through him has waged the war, the victorious and triumph- 
 ant army, the saved citizens, and the free people, and tenders them to 
 him, that he may judge and approve his deeds, and nevertheless does 
 not lay down the power which he had over the army; so, much more, 
 when the world is ended, and all enemies have been suppressed, shall 
 Christ, as the Son, place his immaculate (Eph. 5 : 27) ecclesiastical 
 army in the presence of God the Father, before his tribunal, Rom. 14 : 
 10, and shall say : ' These are they who are not defiled, who have fol- 
 lowed me, the Lamb, whithersoever I have gone, who are the first 
 fruits to Thee, O God, the Father, and to me the Lamb, Rev. 14: 4.' "] 
 
 [10] Holl. (763): " The subjects in this kingdom of glory are both 
 good angels and glorified men (who in faith continue in the kingdom of 
 grace to the end. Matt. 24 : 13 ; Rev. 2 : 10). The regal acts are : the 
 raising to life of the believing dead, their solemn introduction into life 
 eternal, Matt. 25 : 34 ; Luke 22 : 29, 30, and the most happy and glori- 
 ous rule over them." 
 
 [11] Quex. (Ill, 273): " Christ, the king of glory, indeed, even as 
 a man, immediately from his first conception, was the possessor of all 
 glory, but did not actually rule gloriously until after his exaltation, when 
 his sufferings were finished. This very kingdom of glory will truly re- 
 
382 REGAL OFFICE OF CHRIST. 
 
 ceive its final completion in the general resurrection of the dead, the 
 assembling of all of the elect, and their translation to the possession of 
 the heavenly inheritance, and thence will endure to eternity." 
 
 C OF THE STATES OF CHRIST. 
 
 §38. 
 
 As the work of redemption, for whose accomplishment the Myo? 
 became man, could be brought about only through suffering and 
 death, it is altogether natural that we should see Christ, through 
 all his earthly life, even until the completion of his work of re- 
 demption, going about in the form of a servant, subject to all the 
 weaknesses and infirmities of human nature. Not until after his 
 resurrection did he lay aside the form of a servant .and appear in 
 divine glory. Accordingly, from the time of the incarnation of 
 Christ, we have to predicate of him a two-fold condition, that of 
 the form of a servant and that of glory. Inasmuch, however, as 
 in consequence of the communicatio idiom atum, resulting from the 
 unio personalis, the human nature participated in all the attri- 
 butes and glory of the divine nature ; and, inasmuch as, in accor- 
 dance with this, a condition of divine glory would naturally have 
 been looked for from the moment of the incarnation ; we cannot 
 comprehend the antecedent condition in the form of a servant 
 without assuming that Christ voluntarily refrained from a glory 
 that belonged to him. And this indeed is the teaching of the 
 Scriptures in Phil. 2 : 5-9. Accordingly we designate the former 
 condition the State of Humiliation, a condition of self-renuncia- 
 tion, the other the State of Exaltation. This self-renunciation, 
 however, that is followed by his being in the condition of a ser- 
 vant, does not lie in the act of incarnation ; for, although it is 
 a gracious condescension of the Myog, that he assumed human na- 
 ture, yet that cannot be the fact here referred to, as the condition 
 of self-renunciation is designated as temporary, while the incar- 
 nation is permanent. [1] Neither the self-renunciation nor the 
 exaltation, indeed, can be predicated of the ^6yo~ ) or of the divine 
 nature, for this, remaining ever the same, is not susceptible of 
 self-renunciation or of exaltation ; it is only, therefore, of the hu- 
 man nature that the one or the other can be predicated, [2] and 
 
STATE OF HUMILIATION. 383 
 
 it is only to this that the self-renunciation and the exaltation here 
 described refer. But, when self-renunciation is predicated of it, 
 this is not to be so understood, as if in this condition of self-re- 
 nunciation the human nature were entirely stripped of the divine 
 glory and confined entirely to itself, and as if the divine glory, as 
 such, were not associated with the human nature until in the con- 
 dition of exaltation ; for this is disproved already by the fact 
 that Christ, even in the State of Humiliation, performed deeds 
 that imply the possession of divine glory. [3] Finally, the self- 
 renunciation is not to be so understood as if the human nature, in 
 consequence of its inalienable possession of divine glory, really 
 exercised the dominion thence accruing to it, but concealed this 
 exercise from the eyes of men, which would have been no real 
 self-renunciation at all ; [4] but it must be assumed that the hu- 
 man nature, although, in itself considered, having full right to 
 the divine glory, and being in possession of all the dominion re- 
 sulting therefrom, here upon earth voluntarily renounced the use 
 and exercise of the same out of regard for the work of redemption 
 that was to be accomplished, [5] and instead thereof led a life of 
 lowliness; that, therefore, the human nature of Christ, which in 
 virtue of the communicatio idiomatum was entitled to all the ma- 
 jesty belonging to God, renounced the same, and instead thereof 
 assumed poverty, lowliness, and all the natural (though sinless) 
 weaknesses, infirmities, limitations, and wants of human na- 
 ture. [6] The self-renunciation consists, therefore, in the real, 
 though at times interrupted abnegation, by the human nature 
 of Christ, of the glory due unto it, and the exaltation, in the as- 
 sumption by this human nature, of the full use of this divine 
 glory after the completion of the work of redemption. [7] The 
 first state commences with the incarnation and continues until 
 the last moment of his remaining in the tomb. The other begins 
 with the reanimation and continues in eternity, but develops 
 itself in several stages. [8] 
 
 (Br. (482): "The State of Humiliation consists in this, that 
 Christ for a time renounced (truly and really, yet freely) the 
 plenary exercise of the divine majesty, which his human nature 
 had acquired in the personal union, and, as a lowly man, endured 
 what was far beneath the divine majesty (that he might sutler 
 and die for the life of the world).") 
 
384 STATE OF HUMILIATION. 
 
 "The State of Exaltation is the state of Christ the God-man, 
 in which Christ, according to his human nature, having laid 
 aside the infirmities of the flesh, received and assumed the plen- 
 ary exercise of the divine majesty." [9] 
 
 If we now consider the two States more particularly, viz., I, 
 the State of Humiliation, we meet with the following as the 
 principal aspects in which the humiliation of Christ reveals itself: 
 Holl. (759, sq.) [10] 
 
 " 1. Conception, Luke 1 : 31. A supernatural act, by which 
 the flesh of Christ, produced from the mass of the blood of the 
 Virgin Mary, received in her womb its original being, consub- 
 stantial with our own, through the supervention of the Holy 
 Spirit." [11] 
 
 2. Nativity ; which besides was accompanied with many hu- 
 miliating circumstances. "Luke 2 : 7. The nativity of Christ is 
 the going forth of God, as an infant, from the maternal womb 
 into the light of day." [12] 
 
 3. Circumcision; by which Christ, at the same time, made 
 himself subject to the law. " Luke 2 : 21. The circumcision is 
 the bloody cutting off of the foreskin of the infant Jesus on the 
 eighth day." [13] 
 
 4. Education ; according to which Christ also subjected him- 
 self to the laws of domestic life. "The education was his be- 
 coming accustomed, in boyhood, to the mode of life customary 
 in Israel, and to a manual occupation." [14] 
 
 5. The visible intercourse of Christ in the world ; by which he 
 exposed himself to all kinds of ill treatment from those who sur- 
 rounded him, and to all the discomforts of a lowly life. " The in- 
 tercourse of Christ was his most holy association, in the days of 
 his flesh, with all kinds of men, even the most contemptible, an 
 association full of troubles, inconveniences, and dangers." [15] 
 
 6. The great suffering ; the bodily and mental anguish which 
 Christ endured in the last days of his earthly life, "The great 
 suffering of Christ is the extreme anguish which our Eedeemer 
 suffered toward the end of his life, two days before his death, 
 partly in his soul, partly in his body, by enduring to the end the 
 most extreme and bitter sorrows." [16] 
 
 7. The Death of Christ. " The death of Christ is his loss of 
 
STATE OF EXALTATION. 385 
 
 life through the dissolution of the natural union of body and soul." 
 [17] 
 
 8. The Burial. '• The burial of Christ was the placing of the 
 body of our Eedeemer, who had died upon the cross, in a new 
 tomb, in demonstration of the truth of his death." 
 
 II. The State of Exaltation. — This begins with the return 
 of Christ to life, [18] and exhibits itself to the lower world by 
 the descent, to this world by the resurrection and ascension, attain- 
 ing its completion in the session at the right hand of God the 
 Father. [19] 
 
 1. The Descent to the Lower World. After Christ had been 
 again restored to life, and before he had given to men in his 
 resurrection from the dead the proof that he was alive, [20] he 
 descended to hell (1 Pet. 3 : 18-20 ; Col. 2 : 15), and exhibited 
 himself there to Satan and the damned spirits as the victor over 
 death and Satan, and as Lord over death and life. [21] This 
 descent of Christ into hell is, accordingly, not to be understood 
 in a figurative sense, as if thereby only the greatness of the pains 
 which Christ endured for the sake of men were indicated ; or, as 
 if thereby merely the benefits which were secured for men by the 
 sufferings and death of Christ were set forth, namely, that men 
 were freed from hell by them ; but it is to be understood literally 
 as a real descent into hell. [22] We are therefere to regard the 
 whole Christ as being for awhile in hell ; the act of descending 
 is, however, to be predicated only^of his human nature, since his 
 divine nature, as filling all things, is, aside from this, to be un- 
 derstood as entirely present everywhere. [23] (1 Pet. 3 : 18-20 ; 
 Eph.4:9.) 
 
 Holl. (777) : " The descent of Christ to the lower world is the 
 true, real, and supernatural movement by which Christ, having 
 been extricated from the chains of death and restored to life, in 
 his entire person betook himself to the lower regions, that he 
 might exhibit himself as the conqueror of death to the evil spirits 
 and to damned men." [24] 
 
 2. The Resurrection. After his descent to hell, three days 
 after his death, Christ appears again upon earth to a smallcircle 
 of intimate friends. Along with death, however, he had laid 
 aside also the weaknesses and infirmities of human nature, and 
 
386 STATE OF EXALTATION. 
 
 this is now in a glorified condition. Through the resurrection 
 he has proven himself conqueror of death and the devil, and 
 without it our faith would be vain. (1 Cor. 15 : 14.) 
 
 Holl. (779): "The resurrection is the act of glorious victory 
 by which Christ, the God-man, through the same power with 
 God the Father and the Holy Spirit, led forth his body, reunited 
 with the soul and glorified, from the tomb, and showed it alive 
 to his disciples, by various proofs, for the confirmation of our 
 peace, fellowship, joy, and hope in our own future resurrec- 
 tion." [25] 
 
 3. The Ascension. After Christ had shown himself to his dis- 
 ciples as one raised from the dead, he ascended to heaven, i. e., 
 his human nature also betook itself into heaven, where it had 
 not yet been. (Acts 1:9; Luke 24: 51.) 
 
 Holl. (784): "The ascension is the glorious act of Christ by 
 which, after having been resuscitated, he betook himself, accord- 
 to his human nature, by a true, real, and local motion, according 
 to his voluntary determination {per liberam wconomiam)* and 
 in a visible manner unto the clouds, and thence in an invisible 
 manner into the common heaven of the blessed, and to the very 
 throne of God ; so that, having triumphed over his enemies, he 
 might occupy the kingdom of God (Acts 3: 21), reopen the 
 closed Paradise (Eev. 3:7), and prepare a permanent inheritance 
 for us in heaven (John 14: 2)." [26] 
 
 4. The Sitting at the Uiijht Hand of God. This expression 
 signifies the assumption, on the part of the human nature of 
 Christ, of the full divine glory and dominion, for not until his 
 ascension did the human nature of Christ assume, in all its extent, 
 the real exercise of all the divine glory from which it had re- 
 frained in the state of humiliation. (Heb. 1 : 13 ; Eph. 1: 20-22; 
 Mark 16: 19; Eom. 8: 34; Rev. 3: 21.) 
 
 Holl. (786) : " The sitting at the right hand of God is the 
 highest degree of glory, in which Christ, the God- man, having 
 
 * [Quen. (Ill, 382) : "Just as his eating, touching, etc., during the forty days 
 occurred /car' btnovo/uiav, so also this local and visible motion occurred by the same. 
 For we ought not to doubt that, from the gift of agility belonging to glorified 
 bodies, Christ could, in a moment, have withdrawn himself from the eyes of the 
 disciples." — Tr.] 
 
INCARNATION, NOT HUMILIATION. 387 
 
 been exalted, as to his human nature, to the throne of divine 
 majesty, most powerfully and by his immediate presence governs 
 all things which are in the kingdom of power, grace, and glory, 
 for the glory of his own name, and for the solace and safety of 
 the afflicted Church." [27] 
 
 [1] Holl. (765) ; "Although in an ecclesiastical and figurative sense 
 incarnation is sometimes said to be self-renunciation (' where it is em- 
 ployed in reference to the kind inclination by which the loyog inclined 
 himself to pity and assist us, and descending from heaven deigned to 
 assume human nature. This self-renunciation, figuratively and in an 
 ecclesiastical sense so termed, is called the humiliation of incarnation, 
 Grh., Ill, 562'), yet properly speaking, and in accordance with scrip- 
 tural usage, incarnation must not be called self-renunciation (exinanitio). 
 For (1) self-renunciation is predicated of the incarnate (evoapnog) Son of 
 God, or Christ, the God-man ; incarnation, of the not yet incarnate 
 (aaapKog) Son of God; (2) here the self-renunciation that is removed by 
 exaltation is understood, but the state of incarnation remains." 
 
 [2] Holl. (767) : " Christ .was humbled (exinanitus est) according to 
 his human nature considered in the personal union." Id.: " The sub- 
 ject in which is human nature alone, but considered in the union ; for 
 (1) since the divine nature is immutable and most perfect, it cannot be 
 exalted and humbled; (2) the self-renunciation extended even to the 
 death of the cross, Phil. 2: 8, and the divine nature neither died nor 
 was crucified." 
 
 [3] Chmn. (de duab. nat., 216): "Neither was it only after his 
 resurrection that the entire fulness of the divine nature began to dwell 
 bodily in Christ, as though after the occurrence of the hypostatic union 
 in conception and before the ascension, and sitting at the right hand, 
 either any empty vacancy or partialness of divine nature dwelt bodily 
 in Christ, or as though the hypostatic union or personal indwelling of 
 the entire fulness of the Godhead, in the assumed nature of Christ, be- 
 came in the process of years constantly greater, more intimate, fuller, 
 and more complete, inasmuch as, from the first moment of the hypo- 
 static union, the entire fulness of the Godhead dwelt bodily, or, in other 
 words, in the flesh or assumed nature of Christ." 
 
 Holl. (765) : " The self-renunciation of Christ consists . . . not in 
 the entire abdication or abandonment of divine majesty, . . . for (1) 
 this could not have occurred without a dissolution of the personal union ; 
 for, since it is a perfect and inner union, it cannot exist without an im- 
 partation of natures and properties; (2) during the state of self-renun- 
 
388 STATE OF HUMILIATION. 
 
 ciation Christ sometimes produced remarkable proofs of the divine ma- 
 jesty dwelling in his flesh (John 2 : 1 seq.), although Christ exercised 
 this majesty very rarely, and, as it were, extraordinarily." 
 
 [4] Holl. (765) : " Self-renunciation does not consist in the mere 
 concealment or hiding of divine majesty" (" not in such a way as though 
 the use of his majesty were constant and full, but occurred in a secret or 
 hidden manner," Br. (482) ), for, (1) self-renunciation does not per- 
 tain to Christ in his exaltation, although there nevertheless pertains to 
 him a hiding of majesty, 1 Cor. 1:7; (2) the hiding of gifts is not true 
 self-renunciation, just as when the sun, when covered by clouds, has not 
 been truly darkened; although we do not deny that Christ concealed 
 and did not everywhere exert the possession of communicated majesty." 
 
 [Grh. Ill, 575 ; " 1. If by ipvipig, or hiding, there be understood a 
 simulation, we deny that the self-renunciation should be thus de- 
 scribed, because there was a true and real self-renunciation, embracing 
 both apmg i %, e., abstaining from the use, not of just any, but of the plenary 
 communicated divine majesty and virtue, which the apostle calls nevumg^ 
 and &e(ns, i. e., the assumption of a servile form, and extreme humilia- 
 tion, which the apostle joins to the nivumg. Just as, on the other hand, 
 exaltation embraces both apaig^ viz., the laying aside of the form of a ser- 
 vant and human infirmities, which Christ had spontaneously assumed, 
 and &ioig, viz, the full use and administration of dominion in the entire 
 universe, all of which are ascribed to Christ not feignedly or Kara <pdvraap.a f 
 but truly. 2. upvipcg can be referred both to the communication of majesty, 
 and to the employment of communicated majesty. In the former respect 
 it is rightly so-called, because the divine majesty was hid in the assumed 
 flesh, but not separated from it ; and all treasures of wisdom and knowl- 
 edge are said to be hid in him, Col. 2:3. In the latter respect it was 
 not only apvipig, but true and real icevooig, as the assumption of the servile 
 form, which Christ afterwards laid aside in exaltation, shows."] 
 
 [5] Chmn. (de duab. nat., 216): " Self-renunciation, therefore, does 
 not signify a deprivation, removal, despoiling, putting off, casting aside, 
 laying down, removal, want, absence, defect, destitution, or vacancy of 
 the fulness of the Godhead, which, from the very moment of conception, 
 dwelt in Christ bodily. But it respects its use or employment, because, 
 being covered by weakness during the time of self-renunciation, it did 
 not always shine in and through the human nature of Christ, and 
 through it fully and clearly exercise itself; for, for a short time with- 
 drawing and withholding from activity the divine virtue present and 
 dwelling bodily in the human nature, and through the human nature of 
 Christ, as Ambrose says, he permitted his natural properties and other 
 
389 
 
 assumed infirmities to prevail, predominate, and exercise themselves, as 
 if alone in bis human nature. Yet, lest any one, because of the self- 
 renunciation of this employment, should imagine the absence and defect 
 of the very fulness of the divine nature in the humanity of Christ, 
 Christ, in the very time of self-renunciation, whenever he wished, 
 showed that this fulness dwelt in his flesh ; and, in the very time of his 
 self-renunciation, whenever and as far as he wished, he exercised, man- 
 ifested, and employed its use by means of his assumed nature. Thus in 
 miracles he manifested his glory." . . . 
 
 Holl. (765) : (Self-renunciation) "consists in the abdication of the 
 full and uninterrupted use of divine majesty, the assumption of the form 
 of a servant, likeness toother men, and the most humble obedience." 
 
 The detailed description of the state of humiliation is given by Holl. 
 (766) : " Four requisites must be combined in order to describe fully 
 the self-renunciation of Christ : (1) f&p'uifig-" (" intermission, withhold- 
 ing, restraining of the full activity, of the constant and universal divine 
 majesty and excellence really imparted to Christ as a man," Qcex. 
 (Ill, 334) ); " (2) Af/ibig iiop&ijQ Sovlov, the taking upon himself the condi- 
 tion of a servant, for Christ was treated and sold in the manner of a 
 servant, and endured a servant's punishment ; (3) Sfioiwig dvdpu-uv, like- 
 ness to the lower and meaner class of men, especially to the Israelites, 
 in his birth, circumcision, ablactation, his trade as a carpenter, his in- 
 tercourse, and mode of life; (4) raireivufftg viroc-aKTiKr], most humble, ac- 
 tive, and passive obedience." 
 
 The Dogmaticians find the state of humiliation described in Phil. 2 : 
 5-8. The particular phrases occurring in this passage are thus ex- 
 plained by them : " Moptffideov formally and accurately denotes not the 
 divine essence itself, but properly the glorious divine condition, or the 
 glory and universal use of divine majesty, which cannot exist except with 
 a true Godhead, but presuppose the same in the same person." (Quex., 
 Ill, 333.) Chmn. (de duab. nat., 133) : " A popcpf) is when a nature or es- 
 sence is considered as endowed, and clothed, and furnished as it were, 
 with properties, attributes, and conditions, either divine or human." 
 QuEX. (Ill, 333): " 'Ey p-optyij Qeov virapxw. The participle vTzdpxav is 
 here very emphatic, showing (1) that Christ did not take upon himself 
 the fioptpi) 6eov (as it is said that he took upon himself the pop^ SovXov), 
 but that he existed in it ; (2) that with the juop^i) deov, Christ is said to 
 have truly possesssed at the same time a divine essence and nature ; . . 
 (3) that Christ Jesus, when he had taken upon himself the fiop^fj SovXov, 
 neither laid aside the divine nature itself, nor in any way resigned the 
 fiop(pi] 6eov,hut that he did not entirely and fully exercise it, and did not 
 
390 STATE OF HUMILIATION. 
 
 make an ostentatious display of it, but rather that in the form of a ser- 
 vant he ministered to other men, yet in such a way as always to remain 
 vrcapxuv ev /uop([>?] Oeov." HOLL. (766): " '0v£ apirayfibv rjyrjaaro rb elvai tea few.' 
 He did not judge that a public display of the majesty of the almighty 
 and omnipresent God would have the form of robbery, but he held the 
 same secretly, and only when it seemed good to him sent forth some 
 rays of his form as God. "icadeti' to act as though equal in glory and 
 majesty to God. ' 'Eavrbv knivaae, 3 by not shedding forth his imparted 
 majesty, but restraining and withholding its full and universal use. 
 ' Mop<p?i doivW is not human nature, which Christ, the God-man, not only 
 assumed but possessed, and which by his exaltation he did not lay aside ; 
 but it is the state of a servant and a humble condition." Quen. (II, 335) 
 explains the whole passage thus : " That Christ, from the very first 
 moment of incarnation, could have exercised to its fullest extent the 
 divine glory and majesty imparted to him according to his human na- 
 ture, and have acted as God, but that he withheld himself from its full 
 use, and showed himself humble, and became obedient to his Heavenly 
 Father, even to the death of the cross." 
 
 [6] Holl. (767) : " Generally speaking, Christ in the state of self- 
 renunciation abstained from the full, universal, and incessant use of 
 eternal glory, imparted through the personal union to his assumed flesh. 
 John 17: 5." (Concerning this passage it is observed : "Glorification 
 does not denote (a) the granting of the possession of glory, for as man 
 Christ already possessed infinite glory before, John 1 : 14; nor (b) its 
 special employment, which he manifested in certain miracles; (a) but 
 it denotes the enthronization and introduction of Christ as man into his 
 kingdom, which he is to administer with Almighty power.") " Speci- 
 fically, he suspended and withheld the use of omnipotence (the exercise 
 of which would have hindered Christ's sutFering and death of satisfaction 
 for our sins)^, of omniscience (for he was truly ignorant of the day of 
 final judgment, Matt. 24: 36, the barrenness of the fig-tree, Matt. 21: 
 19, the burial-place of Lazarus, John 11 : 34), of the most abundant 
 wealth (inasmuch as he became poor for us, 2 Cor. 8:9; Matt. 8 : 20), 
 of omnipresent dominion (John 11 : 21), and religious worship (inas- 
 much as he became less than the angels, Heb. 2 : 7)." 
 
 [Gkh. Ill, 575, developes the practical side of this doctrine, on the 
 basis of 2 Cor. 8 : 9 : " Christ was rich, because of the true and real 
 communication of divine attributes to the flesh, Col. 2: 9; he was rich, 
 because given a name above every name, Heb. 1 : 4 ; he was rich, be- 
 cause of the power communicated to govern heaven and earth, Matt. 
 28 : 18 ; he was rich, because of his participation in infinite and divine 
 
STATE OF EXALTATION. 391 
 
 knowledge, Col. 2: 3, and because of the subjection of all things, Matt. 
 11 : 26; John 3: 35. With these riches, Christ was endowed from 
 the first moment of incarnation, as is shown by the personal union, the 
 working of miracles, and every special demonstration of this majesty 
 and power. But he became poor by his self-renunciation, humiliation, 
 assumption of the form of a servant ; hence as a child of poverty he is 
 born in a stable, rests in the lap of a poor mother, lies in a poor hut, 
 receives presents of gold from the magi, is presented to the Lord with 
 the offering of doves — gifts of the poor, is brought up in poverty in the 
 home of his parents, is regarded the son of a poor carpenter, experiences 
 poverty in fasting, is without a home of his own, is stripped of his ves- 
 ture on the cross, and at length is laid in the sepulchre of another — all 
 of which pertain to the poverty and self-renunciation of Christ. But 
 by this poverty, he has made us rich. Just as, by his death, he bought 
 for us life, so, by his poverty, he has restored to us heavenly riches ; 
 and hence, his poverty is described to us as a ground for our joy, Zach. 
 9 : 9. The poverty of Christ has earned for us our patrimony, our 
 property in life, our passage money (viaticum) in death, heavenly 
 riches." Then on Phil. 2:5: " 1. The example : ' Thou shouldst 
 deign to be humble for God's sake, since God deigned to be humble 
 for thy sake.' (Augustine.) Christ, without whom nothing was made, 
 humbled himself, so as to seem almost nothing, while thou boastest im- 
 mensely, and thinkest thyself something when thou art nothing. How 
 absurd and preposterous it is for the highest sublimity to be humbled, 
 and the lowest worthlessness to want to extol itself! 2. As Christ hum- 
 bled himself, God exalted him ; so thou wilt not attain to a lofty station, 
 unless by the path of humility, apiary 66bg- vipcjceug rj raTreivuctg. (Bernard). 
 As Christ, by his divine nature, was incapable of growth, but by his 
 descent, he found that whereby he could grow ; so it is only by humility 
 that an entrance to what is high shall open to thee."] 
 
 [7] Holl. (775) : " Exaltation (v-nrepvipucig, Phil. 2:9: 66^aacg, John 
 17:5; cre^avuGig, Heb. 2:9; hdpuviufidg, Heb. 8 : 1), actively taken, is 
 defined as the solemn enthronization and inauguration of the requick- 
 ened Christ to the full and perfect employment of the heavenly govern- 
 ment and the rule of heaven and earth, especially of the Church." 
 
 Quex. (Ill, 368) : " The form of exaltation consists in the laying 
 aside of the servile condition or the form of a servant, and in the full, 
 universal, and uninterrupted employment of the divine majesty, received 
 in the personal union and possessed during the period of self-renun- 
 ciation. (For in exaltation there was not given to Christ new power, 
 virtue, or majesty, which he did not have before, but there was only 
 
392 STATE OF EXALTATION. 
 
 conferred upon him the full power of administering his kingdom, which 
 lie had received through the union itself.)" 
 
 The principal passage in which the state of exaltation is described is 
 (besides 8: 6, 7; 110: 1; Heb. 2:7; Acts 5 : 31) the same before re- 
 ferred to, viz., Phil. 2: 9-11. Holl. (775) : "(a) The particle 6w 
 does not denote a meritorious conferring, but a consequence in order. 
 [The 6i6 being often cited to prove that by his humiliation, Christ pro- 
 cured merit for himself, Grh., Ill, 584, argues that such doctrine 
 would conflict with : 1. The dignity of Christ's person, since, at the 
 very first moment of the incarnation, the human nature was brought 
 into the very person of the Logos, than which nothing higher in glory 
 and dignity can be imagined, Heb. 1:5. 2. The truth of the communi- 
 cation of truly divine gifts. 3. The quality of his merit. For whatever 
 Christ merited in his office, he merited for us, Is. 45 : 24; Zech. 9:9; 
 John 17:19; 1 Tim. 1 : 15 ; 1 Cor. 1 : 30. 4. The worship due him 
 in the days of the flesh. For if it were only after the exaltation that 
 worship was due him, then in the days of his flesh such was not due ; 
 and yet often he did not refuse such worship when offered him. As to 
 the meaning of 6i6'> 1. The humiliation is not described as the meritori- 
 ous cause of the exaltation, but the exaltation is described as the con- 
 sequent profit attending the humiliation. For the particles 616 and did 
 tovto do not always and everywhere denote the meritorious cause of a 
 thing, but sometimes also the final, and more frequently the conse- 
 quence, whereby one thing is concluded from another. Cf. Gen. 2: 24; 
 Matt. 19 : 5 ; Mark 7 : 29 ; Rom. 2 : 1 ; 2 Cor. 4:13; 6: 17 ; Eph. 4: 
 8, 25; Heb. 1:9. 2. Compare the parallel passage, Luke 24: 29. 
 The order, therefore, was divinely appointed, that Christ by his passion, 
 and after his passion, should enter into glory. Heb. 2: 9, 10, where 
 Sia rb Tzadrina, did Tradrjfi&Tov, cannot refer to a meritorious cause. The di6, 
 compounded of the pronoun 6 and the preposition did must be rendered 
 wherefore, so that the order and consequence, but not the effect of the 
 merit, are indicated. 4. Xaplfro&ai, " to give gratuitously," excludes 
 the idea of merit. 5. The scope of the argument is not to inculcate 
 confidence in merit, but to commend the pursuit of humility, so that we 
 may expect from God the gratuitous bestowed advantages consequent 
 upon humility.] (b) The bestower of glory is God the Father. John 
 17:7; Rom. 6 : 4." (Yet only by way of pre-eminence as the original 
 Source ; otherwise it is an act of the entire Trinity, and we can also 
 say, "The Son raised himself from the dead." John 2: 19.) "(c) 
 vTrepvipuaig, having followed self-renunciation and humiliation, . . . im- 
 plies, in place of the emptying of the form of God, the full employment 
 
STATES OF CHRIST. 393 
 
 of the form of God ; in place of the hiding of those things which are 
 equal with God, their public manifestation ; in place of the assumption 
 of the form of a servant, the laying aside of the same, and the admin- 
 istration of universal dominion, (d) The giving of a name above every 
 name, marks the conferring of the highest glory, than which none that 
 is more lofty can be named, and which, with respect to its fullest use, 
 has been presented to Christ by means of exaltation, (e) The conse- 
 quence of the presented glory is the subjection of all creatures, repre- 
 sented by the bowing of the knee. Ps. 97 : 7 ; Rev. 5 : 13 ; John 14 : 
 13 ; James 2 : 19 ; 10: 17. What was said of the humiliation is equally 
 true of the exaltation, viz.: " (1) That this term is not employed in an 
 ecclesiastical sense, for the bringing up of humanity into the person of 
 the ?.6yog, and therefore, as a consequence, the impartation of divine 
 grounds of glorying (ah xv /Liara)," but "in a biblical sense as it denotes 
 the universal glorification of Christ, who has been freed from death ;" 
 (2) That the exaltation has reference only to the human nature of 
 Christ. 
 
 Chmn. (de duab. nat., 218) thus contrasts the terms incarnation, 
 humiliation, and exaltation: "Accordingly it is also manifest from this, 
 that a confusion of articles of faith cannot occur, but that they are and 
 remain distinct, and that each contains something peculiar to itself. 
 For in incarnation there occurred a hypostatic union of the Godhead of 
 the 16yog with assumed humanity, in which the whole fulness of the 
 Godhead dwelt personally from the first moment of conception. But 
 by reason of self-renunciation, its employment and manifestation were 
 tor a time postponed, and, as it were, suspended, so that, through the 
 assumed humanity, it did not exercise itself immediately and always. 
 Moreover, by the ascension, infirmities being laid aside and self-renunci- 
 ation removed, he left the mode of life according to the conditions of this 
 world, and departed from the world. Moreover, by sitting at the right 
 hand of God, he entered upon the full and public employment and dis- 
 play of the power, virtue, and glory of the Godhead, which, from the 
 beginning of the union, dwelt personally in all its fulness in the as- 
 sumed nature ; so that he no longer, as in self-renunciation, withholds, 
 withdraws, and, as it were, hides himself, but clearly, manifestly, and 
 gloriously exercises it in, with, and through the assumed human 
 nature." 
 
 [8] Holl. (768) : " The state of self-renunciation lasted from the 
 
 first moment of conception to the last moment of rest in the sepulchre." 
 
 Quex. (Ill, 367) : " The beginning of the exaltation {terminus a quo), 
 
 and that through which it was attained, is the preceding passion and 
 
 26 
 
394 STATE OF HUMILIATION. 
 
 self-renunciation. The limit to which {terminus ad quern) is infinite 
 glory and majesty (John 17:5; Eph. 1 : 20 ; Phil. 2 : 9, 10), here con- 
 sidered with reference to their employment and distinct degrees." 
 
 [9] The doctrine as here stated is not so clearly set forth in the 
 Form. Cong. This asserts, indeed, very decidedly, that Christ, already 
 here upon earth, was in possession of the divine glory, even according 
 to his human nature ; but, along with passages in which it is said that 
 Christ, during his life upon earth, renounced the exercise of # this glory, 
 there are also others in which a renunciation is not mentioned. To 
 passages of the former kind belong the following : Form. Conc. (Sol. 
 Dec, VIII, 26): "From this union and communion of natures, the 
 human nature possesses, since the resurrection from the dead, that ex- 
 altation over all creatures in heaven and on earth, which is really 
 nothing else than that Christ entirely laid aside the form of a servant, 
 and yet did not lay aside the human nature, but retains it to all eternity, 
 and that, according to his assumed human nature, he was raised to the 
 full possession and use of divine majesty. Moreover, he had this majesty 
 immediately at his conception, even in the womb of his mother ; but, 
 as the Apostle (Phil. 2 : 8) says, ^ He humbled (exinanivit) himself,' 
 and, as Luther teaches, in the state of his humiliation he possessed it 
 secretly, and did not always make use of it, but only so often as seemed 
 good to him. But now, since he has ascended to heaven, not in a com- 
 mon manner, as any other saint, but as the Apostle (Eph. 4 : 10) testi- 
 fies, ' He ascended up far above all heavens/ and really 'fills all things,' 
 and is everywhere present, not only as God, but also as man, he rules 
 and reigns from sea to sea and to the ends of the earth." Form. Conc. 
 (Ep. 16) : " And this majesty, by reason of the personal union, Christ 
 always possessed, but in the state of his humiliation he humbled {exin- 
 anivit) himself, and, for this reason, truly grew in age, wisdom, and 
 favor with God and men. Wherefore, he exercised this majesty not 
 always, but as often as seemed good to him, until, after his resurrection, 
 he fully and entirely laid aside the form of a servant, but not human 
 nature, and was invested with the full employment, manifestation, and 
 declaration of divine majesty, and in this manner entered into his glory. 
 (Phil. 2 : 6, seq.) Therefore, now, not only as God, but as man also, 
 he knows all things, can do all things, is present to all creatures, and 
 has under his feet and in his hand all things that are in heaven, on earth, 
 and under the earth. Matt. 28 : 18 ; John 13 : 3. ; Eph. 4: 10.)" Form. 
 Conc. (Sol. Dec, VIII, 65) : ''But, in the state of humiliation, this 
 majesty of human nature was for the greater part concealed, and, as it 
 were, kept secret." 
 
DIVERSE VIEWS AMONG THE EARLY DOGMATTCTANS. 395 
 
 To the second class (Sol. Dec, VIII, 73): " But this certainly does 
 not occur in such a manner, that as man he knows and can accomplish 
 only some things ; just as other saints, by the power of the Holy Ghost, 
 know and can accomplish certain things. For, since Christ, by reason 
 of his Divinity, is the second person in the Holy Trinity, and from him, 
 no less than from the Father, the Holy Ghost proceeds, . . . undoubt- 
 edly, through the hypostatic union, the entire fulness of the Spirit has 
 been imparted to Christ, according to the flesh, which has been person- 
 ally united to the Son of God. Moreover, this exerts its entire power 
 most freely in and with the human nature of Christ, and through it, not 
 in such a manner as that Christ, according to his human nature, knows 
 only some things and is ignorant of others, and can accomplish certain 
 things yet cannot accomplish others ; but even now, according to his 
 assumed human nature, he knows and can accomplish all things . . 
 75. Moreover, it is manifest from history that there was a sect called 
 Aynoetce, because they imagined that the Son, as the Word of the 
 Father, indeed knew all things, but that his assumed nature was ignor- 
 ant, of many things. This heresy also Gregory the Great refuted." 
 
 The Form. Conc. was still undecided in regard to this topic, because 
 the Dogmaticians of that day were not agreed upon it. Some, following 
 Brenz (De divina majestate Domini nostri Jesu Christi ad dextram Dei 
 patris et de vera praesentia corporis et sanguinis ejus in coena, 1562) as- 
 serted that Christ, also in the state of humiliation, was not only in posses- 
 sion of the divine glory, but also exercised it here, only not openly. ("He 
 lay dead in the sepulchre, in humiliation ; living, he governed heaven 
 and earth, in majesty ; and this, indeed, during the time of his humili- 
 ation, before his resurrection.") The others followed Chmn. (De Dua- 
 bus Naturis in Christo, 1570), who, it is true, also ascribed the posses- 
 sion of divine glory to Christ, but taught a partial renunciation of the 
 use of it during his life upon earth. (" The human nature, in the first 
 moment of the union, received and possessed the majesty, the fulness 
 of the Deity, but during the time of the humiliation did not always exer- 
 cise and use it.") The Form. Conc. did not deem it necessary to ex- 
 press a decided judgment upon the question. Later (1619) the question 
 was again started, and a controversy arose between the Theologians of 
 Giessen and those of Tiibingen. The starting point was the omnipres- 
 ence of the flesh of Christ (comp. § 33, note 20, near the end). The 
 Tiibingen theologians (L. Osiaxder, Nikolai, and Thummius) were 
 of the opinion that the omnipresence of Christ was so strictly an imme- 
 diate consequence of the personal union, that the flesh of Christ was to 
 be regarded as omnipresent from the moment of his conception; and 
 
396 STATE OF HUMILIATION. 
 
 they defined the omnipresence as an absolute presence (nuda adessentia) 
 or propinquity to creatures, by which he was closely present to all crea- 
 tures. They assumed, therefore, an absolute omnipresence (in the sense 
 in which Br. (comp. §33, note 20) had denied it). This opinion, then, 
 had its influence upon the doctrine of the state of humiliation and exal- 
 tation. Omnipresence, considered as a mere nearness, was necessarily 
 predicated also of the human nature of Christ, as it was an immediate 
 consequence of the personal union ; and there could be no question as to 
 the use or renunciation of it ; and then, too, dominion could not readily 
 be denied to the same nature to which uninterrupted nearness was as- 
 cribed. Hence, they maintained that there was a difference only in the 
 manner in which Christ exercised this dominion, in one way in the state 
 of humiliation, and in another in the state ofexaltation. The only differ- 
 ence between the state of humiliation and the state of exaltation they 
 held to be, that in the former Christ exercised this dominion in theform 
 of a servant, hidden from the eyes of the world, and in the latter, openly 
 and in a form corresponding to his majesty. ("They taught, that Christ 
 in his humiliation governed heaven and earth, in the same way that, he 
 exercises this government in the state of exaltation, sitting at the right 
 hand of the Father ; with only this difference, that in the state of humil- 
 ation he covered and concealed that government under the form of a ser- 
 vant, but now, having laid aside that servile condition, he declares and 
 manifests the same gloriously and majestically.'") 
 
 According to this theory of the Tiibingen Theologians there was, 
 therefore, no nevuaig- (renunciation) in the proper sense of the word, but 
 merely a Kpvipcg- (concealment) ; for the divine dominion, according to 
 this view, was exercised also during the state of humiliation by the hu- 
 man nature, only in a secret manner, not perceptible to men (hence also 
 from the statement: "That Christ, according to his human nature, al- 
 ready from the first moment of his conception sat at t?ie right hand of the 
 Father, not indeed in a gloriously majestic manner, but without that and 
 in the form of a servant") ; and the assumption of the form of a servant 
 and of human infirmities on the part of Christ, could not be explained, 
 though the Tubingen theologians wished to do so, as such a real tcevucug, 
 or self-renunciation. According to this theory, also, the same exaltation, 
 which, according to the other, did not take place until after the resurrec- 
 tion of Christ, was assumed as existing at once from the moment of the 
 incarnation (" That most strictly speaking, there is one exaltation, and 
 only one, most perfectly accomplished in the moment of the assumption, 
 which (by reason of his essence) could not be greater and more exalted; 
 but that the later meaning of the exaltation {i. e., the exaltation of 
 
DIVERSE VIEWS AMONG THE EAELY DOGMATICTANS. 397 
 
 Christ following his resurrection) was not the new addition of dignity 
 and excellence, but the majesty previously given and communicated in 
 the moment of the assumption and union, covered over in the state of 
 humiliation, and veiled under the form of a servant, but in the state of 
 exaltation abundantly revealed, uncovered, manifested, and demonstrated 
 before the inhabitants of heaven and all other creatures"). And the 
 only difference between the state of humiliation and the state of exalta- 
 tion was this, that in both the manner of the exercise of the divine ma- 
 jesty was different. (" That the exaltation, following upon the resur- 
 rection of Christ from the dead and his ascension into heaven, did not 
 confer anything upon Christ, in his humanity, but only the mode of some- 
 thing, i. e., that Christ, restored to life as man, and exalted to the right 
 hand of God, did not indeed attain the full use of the divine majesty in 
 the government of the world, but merely received a new mode of govern- 
 ment, viz., one majestically glorious and manifest; for, in the state of 
 humiliation, he had been as to his person ignominious and obscure.") 
 
 This view was opposed by the theologians of Giessen (Menzer and 
 Feuerborn), who adopted that of Chemnitz. The question at issue 
 was this : " Whether the man Christ, having been taken into union 
 with God, during the state of his humiliation, governed, as a present 
 king, all things, though in secret?" This question the Giessen theo- 
 logians denied, and those of Tubingen affirmed. In the case of the 
 former, the doctrine assumed a different aspect, already in consequence 
 of a different conception of omnipresence. They rejected absolute omni- 
 presence ; therefore they did 'not assume that Christ, according to his 
 human nature, in the state of humiliation, was present to all creatures ; 
 but defined omnipresence as a divine work. (" They held that the idea 
 of a work belongs to the definition of omnipresence and to its constitu- 
 tive character, as they call it, and that the essential part is, that Christ, 
 in his humiliation, did not exhibit himself as present in the same sense 
 as that held by the Tubingen theologians." Cotta, Diss. II, in Grh., 
 Loc. IV, 62.) According to their view, there followed, from the per- 
 sonal union, only this, that the real, possession of the divine attributes 
 belonged to the human nature of Christ ("from the first moment of his 
 conception, Christ, as man, had regal majesty," etc.), but the use which 
 the human nature made of them they inferred, not so much from the 
 personal union as rather from the divine will (" the question was, as to 
 the adequate and formal basis of omnipresence; . . . whether this is 
 to be found in the personal union alone, or in the free will of Christ and 
 his sitting at the right hand of the Father ? The former is held by the 
 Tubingen theologians, the latter by those of Giessen"). The personal 
 
39S STATE OF HUMILIATION. 
 
 union did not, therefore, seem to them as if dissolved, when the human 
 nature made no use of these divine attributes (" the not using the divine 
 majesty does not dissolve the person, but the not having it"); just as 
 they also believed that, without detriment to the personal union, they 
 could assume that the divine nature of Christ was intimately present to 
 creatures at all times, but not so the human nature. Quen. (Ill, 187) : 
 "Although during the whole period of the humiliation the divine nature 
 of the Word was present to all creatures, so that meanwhile the human 
 nature, taken into union with God, was not present, but was very far 
 removed, even in its substantial nearness, from those creatures to whom 
 the \6yoq was present ; neverthess, the union is not broken, the person is 
 not divided, the natures are not separated." 
 
 They also believed themselves, therefore, not to be hindered by the 
 previously prevalent assumption, that Christ, according to his human 
 nature, had for a season renounced the use and exercise of the divine 
 dominion ; and they maintained that Christ, according to his divine 
 nature, exercised dominion over the world until the completion of his 
 work of redemption, without his human nature taking any part therein. 
 According to their theory, moreover, the exaltation was real (as indeed 
 the positive statements of the Holy Scriptures seemed to them to de- 
 mand), in such a sense that, not until it occurred, therefore not until 
 the resurrection, did the human nature obtain the full use and the full 
 exercise of the divine dominion ; whereby, however, it was not meant 
 to deny that the human nature partially, and by way of exception, as in 
 the performance of miracles, made use of this dominion (which feature 
 was made especially prominent by the Saxon theologians). The differ- 
 ence between the state of humiliation and that of exaltation they held 
 to be this, that the human nature did not attain the full use of the di- 
 vine dominion until the introduction of the latter. By this theory of 
 theirs, they thought to avoid the absurdities that followed from the 
 views of the Tubingen theologians, as e. g., that according to that the- 
 ory, at the time when Christ was lying in the cradle and in the grave, 
 or hanging upon the cross, he was also, according to his human nature, 
 filling all things and present everywhere and to all creatures. 
 
 After the decision (1624) pronounced by the Saxon theologians, 
 which in the main was favorable to the Giessen theologians, those of 
 Tubingen modified their views in this direction, in this one point, that 
 they also admitted a humiliation in a literal sense, with reference to the 
 functions of the sacerdotal office, in accordance with which, therefore, 
 Christ, in relation to these, renounced the use -of the divine glory during 
 his passion and death, and in connection with everything that he did in 
 
ACTS OF HUMILIATION. 399 
 
 behalf of the work of redemption. (" The Tubingen theologians began 
 to moderate their views and to concede, ' as to the object of the sacrifice 
 and passion, or, what is the same thing, as to the sacerdotal office, that 
 Christ truly stripped himself of the divine majesty, and thus, as to the 
 state contrasted with the passion, really and truly received a majesty 
 not possessed before ; but that, as to the prophetic and regal offices, the 
 humiliation was a mere occultation, and, on the other hand, that the 
 exaltation, as to these two offices, consisted only in the revelation, not 
 in the actual impartation of majesty.' ") But this difference still con- 
 tinued between the two parties, that the Tubingen theologians, adhering 
 to their former opinion, so far as the prophetic and the regal offices are 
 concerned, regarded the humiliation as a mere occultation, and charac- 
 terized it as only exceptional, when Christ, during his life upon earth, 
 in certain cases (before alluded to) renounced the exercise of the domin- 
 ion belonging to his human nature ; while the Giessen divines, in direct 
 opposition to this view, considered it exceptional, when Christ, during 
 his life upon earth, made use, on the part of his human nature, of the 
 right of divine majesty that belonged to him. The controversy was in- 
 terrupted by the Thirty Years' War, but the succeeding theologians 
 adopted the views of the Giessen and Saxon theologians, as above 
 stated, with the exception of some of those of Tubingen, who after- 
 wards, indeed, attached no great importance to the controversy, but still 
 favored the doctrinal tendency of their University (comp. Cotta, Diss. 
 
 II, Grh., in Loc. Th., IV). A full discussion of this doctrine and de- 
 scription of the controversies connected with it, may be found in Quen. 
 
 III, 389, seq. (from whom the above quotations from the writings of the 
 Tubingen and Giessen theologians have been cited) and Thomasius : 
 "The Person and Work of Christ," Part II, second edition, 1857, p. 
 429. 
 
 [10] Quen. (Ill, 338) : " The self-renunciation of Christ in general 
 consists of two acts, viz., the abdication of the full and universal use of 
 imparted majesty, and the assumption of the form of a servant. This 
 very form or condition of a servant, in turn, includes under it certain 
 acts in which it was manifest." 
 
 Other distributions than those given in the text. Grh. (I, 361) : 
 11 Conception, the being borne about in the womb, birth, growth in age 
 and wisdom, obedience in the form of a servant even to the death of the 
 cross, which was followed by burial." Kg. (161) : Conception, birth, 
 suffering, abandonment, death, burial." Quen., as Kg., only he adds 
 thereto : " Subjection to the law in circumcision." Br., as Holl., only 
 he omits circumcision. 
 
400 STATE OF HUMILIATION. 
 
 [11] Holl. (769): " We now are considering this not absolutely 
 with respect to itself, but, in so far as it pertains to the state of self- 
 renunciation, or, in so far as the flesh of Christ, although not of male 
 seed, was nevertheless formed in the womb of woman ; in connection 
 with which it is certain that some infirmities occur." 
 
 Grh. (I, 361): " From the fact which I have mentioned, that con- 
 ception, and the being borne about in the womb, and birth from the 
 womb of his mother, belong to the state of self-renunciation, if we re- 
 fleet, it can be understood that Adam was a true man, who, neverthe- 
 less, was neither conceived in the womb nor born from the womb of a 
 mother ; therefore, in the same manner, the Son of God, without such 
 a conception and birth, could have assumed human nature, but he wished 
 in all things to be made like to his brethren, Heb. 2 : 17." 
 
 [12] Br. (483): "In this" (birth) "the fact is especially consid- 
 ered that the fruit of Mary's womb, having passed through the accus- 
 tomed months of gestation, was thus at length brought to light, in accord- 
 ance with the common lot of men. But the opinion of some, that Mary 
 brought forth her son while her womb was closed, is uncertain ; more 
 certain and manifest are the lowliness of his birth and the humble con- 
 dition and poverty of his parents." 
 
 [13] Holl. (769): "Circumcision is an act of most humble obe- 
 dience on the part of Christ, by which he not only lay in a very low 
 state of self-renunciation beneath the knife of the circumciser, but also 
 was made subject to the divine law, although, nevertheless, he was the 
 Lord of the law, Matt. 12: 8 ; Mark 2 : 28." 
 
 [14] Holl. (770): "According to which, Christ voluntarily sub- 
 jected himself to the care of his father, Joseph, and the commands of 
 his mother, Mary, Luke 2 : 51." 
 
 [15] Br. (484): " He was made subject to the magistracy and regarded 
 equal or inferior to others ; for the purpose of satisfying hunger and 
 thirst, he ate and drank ; being wearied, he slept, and endured the trou- 
 bles of labors and journeys, dangers, temptations, sadness, poverty, 
 reproaches, etc." 
 
 [16] Br. (484): "Especially the aggregation of afflictions which 
 Christ suffered during the period of two days before his death ; in con- 
 nection with which the forsaking, mentioned in Matt. 27 : 46, is espe- 
 cially to be regarded. Manifestly Christ was forsaken, not indeed as 
 though either the bond of the personal union were broken, or he had 
 been altogether rejected from the face of God, never to be taken back 
 again into grace, nor that he, actually and properly speaking, despaired ; 
 but, that in the greatest accumulation of evils, because of the sins of 
 
THE DESCENSUS. 401 
 
 men imputed to him, he so felt the wrath of God, or God as estranged 
 from him, while hearing the part of all sinners, that he felt no comfort 
 within himself from the fulness of the indwelling Godhead. In this 
 manner, also, that must be understood which is elsewhere said, viz., that 
 Christ bore the pains of hell." 
 
 [17] Quen. (111,360): "Its formal nature consists in the true, 
 voluntary, and local separation of the soul from the body (Luke 23: 43, 
 46), the bond of the personal union meanwhile remaining unimpaired. 
 Note : From the dissolution of the soul from the body the dissolution of 
 the union of the two natures in Christ is not to be inferred. For, al- 
 though the natural union between the soul and body was broken, yet 
 the personal union existing between the \6yoq and the assumed nature 
 was not separated, but the divine nature in Christ remained truly united 
 to the soul, which then was in heaven, and truly united to the body in 
 the sepulchre. Even in death the 16-yog, I say, remained a suppositum* 
 of parts physically separated, namely of body and soul. The entire di- 
 vine nature was in the separated soul, and the entire divine nature was 
 in the body left upon earth, without any division or distention, as either 
 of these would conflict with a divine nature." Holl. (772): "The 
 passion and death of Christ were true, not imaginary; voluntary, not 
 forced; undertaken not by accident, but according to a certain plan and 
 purpose of God ; bloody and ignominious, vicarious, meritorious, and 
 satisfactory." 
 
 [18] Holl. (776): " Zaoiroiyaig or quickening is Christ's liberation 
 from death and the reunion of soul and body, by which Christ, accord- 
 ing to his flesh, began to come again to life. This is not a peculiar 
 grade of exaltation, but a prerequisite condition for preparing the sub- 
 ject, namely, Christ, to receive the full and universal use of divine 
 majesty." 
 
 [19] Holl. (776): "The revived Christ exercised his divine maj- 
 esty through certain clearly marked grades: (1) by descending ad 
 inferos, he exhibited himself alive to the wicked spirits and condemned 
 men as the conqueror of death; (2) by rising again, he declared to the 
 apostles, and, through them, to the entire world, that through his death 
 he had made satisfaction to divine justice ; (3) by ascending to heaven, 
 he showed angels and blessed men that he was the conqueror not only 
 of death, but also of wicked spirits, and the Saviour of men ; (4) by sit- 
 ting at the right hand of God, he exercises most full and universal 
 dominion over all creatures that are in the kingdom of power, of grace, 
 
 * [See Appendix.] 
 
402 STATE OF EXALTATION. 
 
 and of glory." As the exaltation was completed with the sitting at the 
 right hand of the Father, Hfrffr. (339), instead of assuming degrees 
 of exaltation, as others do, distinguishes "the state of glorification into 
 which Christ entered after his resurrection, while, laying aside the in- 
 firmities of human nature, he was transferred to the condition of glori- 
 fied bodies," and " the state of majesty of Christ as a man, into which 
 Christ, after his glorious ascension into heaven, was transferred, and 
 was placed at the right hand of God the Father." 
 
 [20] Quen. (Ill, 373) : " The moment of time of the descent is, ac- 
 cording to 1 Peter 3 : 19, the time that intervened between the quick- 
 ening and the resurrection of Christ, properly so called." To the asser- 
 tion, that the descent preceded the resurrection, and therefore did not 
 succeed the vivifying, Holl. (668) replies: " A distinction must be 
 made between an outward and an inner resurrection. The former is the 
 going forth from the sepulchre, and the outward appearance to men, 
 and is described in the Apostles' Creed ; the latter is the quickening 
 itself." 
 
 [21] Holl. (778) : " Christ descended into hell, not for the purpose 
 of suffering any evil from the demons (John 19: 30; Luke 24: 26), 
 but to triumph over the demons (Rev. 1 : 18 ; Col. 2 : 15), and to con- 
 vince condemned men that they were justly shut up in the infernal 
 prison, 1 Peter 3 : 19. The preaching of Christ in hell was not evan- 
 gelical, which is proclaimed to men only in the kingdom of grace, but 
 legal, accusatory, terrible, and that too, both verbal, by which he con- 
 vinced them that they had merited eternal punishments, and real, by 
 which he struck frightful terror into them." To the question, "Why 
 did Christ preach in hell to those alone who were unbelieving in the 
 time of Noah?" Holl. replies (ib.) : "(1) Others are not excluded, 
 but these are presented as monstrous examples of impenitence and un- 
 paralleled examples of divine judgment ; (2) The Apostle especially 
 named these to teach that even the antediluvians ought to have believed 
 in Christ; . . . (3) That the Apostle might pass conveniently from 
 the flood, as a type, to its antitype, baptism." 
 
 [22] Quen. (Ill, 371): "The descent of Christ ad inferos, figura- 
 tively taken, is understood either metaphorically, as denoting that most 
 exquisite and truly infernal pain and anguish which, in the time of his 
 passion, Christ felt and bore in his most holy soul, Ps. 16 : 10 ; or, by 
 metonymy, as denoting the virtue and efficacy of Christ's passion and 
 death, Zech. 9 : 11 (as though the sense were, ' Christ, by his passion 
 and death, effected and purchased by his merit our deliverance and re- 
 demption from hell'). But neither signification pertains to this article." 
 
HIS DESCENT INTO HELL. 403 
 
 Holl. (777) : " But, taken literally, the descensus ad inferos denotes a 
 true and real departure into the place of the damned, inasmuch as Peter 
 (1 Pet. 3 : 19) calls it a iropeia or going, cf. Matt. 5 : 25 ; Rev. 18:2; 
 20 : 7 ; 2 Pet. 2 : 4." The observation is added : " Although the de- 
 scent of Christ ad inferos was true and real, yet the motion was not 
 physical or local, but supernatural. For physical and local motion is 
 peculiar to natural bodies ; but the revived body of Christ was a glori- 
 fied body. Nor was the movement successive ; it was made, kv iruey/mri, 
 i. e., by divine power, which knows nothing of tedious efforts." 
 
 [23] Quex. (Ill, 372) : " Christ, the God-man, and therefore his 
 entire person (and hence not only according to his soul, or only accord- 
 ing to his body), after the reunion of soul and body, descended to the 
 very place of the damned, and to the devils and the damned manifested 
 himself as conqueror. For the descent, since it is a personal action, 
 cannot be ascribed otherwise than to the entire person of the God-man. 
 And, as in the Apostles' Creed, it is said of the entire God-man that he 
 suffered, was crucified, dead, and buried, so also it is said of the same 
 that he descended into hell." The descent is, very naturally, predi- 
 cated of Christ, the God-man, i. e., it is taught that Christ, ttie God- 
 man, was for a time in hell ; but the descent itself is predicated only of 
 the human nature of Christ. ' l Christ descended into hell, not accord- 
 ing to his divine nature ; for, according to this, he was in hell before, 
 filling all things through his dominion. . . . Therefore, Christ de- 
 scended, according to his human nature. For the predications Bava-uOelq 
 oapKl and ^uo-oLr/delg, belong to the human nature alone." (Quex., Ill, 
 373.) 
 
 [24] The doctrine as here set forth belongs to the period of the later 
 Dogmaticians. Until the time of the Form. Coxc, no explanation 
 whatever was attempted of the phrase, " Descendit ad inferos," which 
 was found already in the Apostles' Creed. The Form. Coxc, how- 
 ever, was led to make a statement concerning it, mainly in consequence 
 of controversies originating with the Hamburg Superintendent, John 
 Aepix (1o49). According to him the descent of Christ was "a part 
 of that entire obedience which he rendered for our redemption." (" The 
 simple and plain confession of Aepixus : I believe that the descent of 
 the soul of Christ to hell was a part of Christ's passion, i. e., of the 
 contests, dangers, difficulties, pains, and punishments, which, for our 
 sake, he took upon himself and bore, for the reason that, in the Scrip- 
 tures, to descend into hell means to be involved in extreme and the 
 deepest griefs, pains, and difficulties. I believe that the descent of 
 Christ to hell was a part of his obedience, predicted in the prophets, and 
 
404 STATE OF EXALTATION. 
 
 imposed upon him because of our sin.") The descent of Christ is, 
 therefore, " one act of his humiliation, and, indeed, its final stage." 
 (" I believe that the descent of Christ belongs to his humiliation, not 
 to his glorification and triumph. . . . The final grade of this humility 
 and self-renunciation, and the extreme part of the obedience and satis- 
 faction imposed upon Christ by the judgment of God, was his descent 
 to hell.") While the body of Christ lay in the grave, his soul descended 
 into hell; he did not descend with body and soul after their reunion, 
 before the resurrection, but with the soul alone ("Peter clearly teaches, 
 Acts 2, that the soul of Christ, while his body rested in the sepulchre, 
 experienced the pains of death and hell "), and " the descent was not a 
 public act of victory and triumph, but an act of suffering, to which 
 Christ submitted in the same sense in which he subjected himself to 
 the condemnation of death." ("The testimonies of Scripture nowhere 
 show, by even the least indication, that to descend to hell is to triumph, 
 and that the descent itself is a joyful, glad, splendid, and manifest tri- 
 umph. There is, therefore, nothing certain and well-established in the 
 cavilling of those who contend that the descent of Christ was nothing 
 else thaft the fierceness, manifest force, and triumph of Christ, by which 
 he utterly crushed, and, with violence, oppressed those in hell.") 
 " Christ has, indeed, destroyed hell for us, and robbed the devil of his 
 power, not, however, by violent destruction or suppression, but by right- 
 eousness and obedience ; as he conquered and destroyed death by his 
 dying, so also did he the same to hell by his descent into it." (" As 
 Christ did not vanquish death by force and manifest violence, but in 
 death by truly dying, so he overthrows those in hell not by warlike or 
 glorious violence, and with manifest oppression of the devil, but by 
 righteousness, by truly dying, by descending for us to those in hell, and 
 rising again from death.") Aepin constantly protests against the use 
 of the Petrine passages in the discussion of the doctrine of the descent 
 of Christ to the lower world. ... As proof passages for this article of 
 faith, in addition to the Apostles' Creed, the following are applicable : 
 Ps. 16: 10; 68 : 19 ; 30: 4; Hos. 13: 14; Acts 2 : 27 ; Matt. 12: 40; 
 Eph. 4: 8, 9; Rom. 10: 6, 7. 
 
 A question of entirely different character was agitated, in 1565, by 
 the court chaplain, John Parsimonius, in Stuttgard. " He called in 
 question the locality of the lower regions. Hell was, in his opinion, no 
 locality, no corporeal fire, no corporeal darkness." (" Scripture, in- 
 deed, calls hell a place, and says that it is situated beneath and below 
 us, but these are to be understood not according to Aristotle and math- 
 ematically, but theologically and according to the usage of Scripture. 
 
HIS DESCENT INTO HELL. 405 
 
 . . . The terms, "place," "upward," "downward," "above," "be- 
 neath," " within," " high," " deep," and the like, are not terms of the 
 spiritual but of the bodily world; and when Scripture speaks of spiritual 
 things and those of the other world, it borrows terms from bodily and 
 earthly things, and uses them not literally but metaphorically.") "Hell 
 is where God's wrath is, and the perception of this wrath. Accordingly, 
 the descent to hell cannot be a corporeal, local movement, but only a 
 change of condition, according to the measure of the conception above 
 given of the lower regions. . . Christ did not, therefore, after being 
 made alive in the grave, before the resurrection, descend in a corporeal 
 and local manner to hell. How Christ descended, and when, this the 
 Scriptures have not specially revealed to us." (" Holy Scripture wishes 
 us to believe that Christ descended to those in hell, and freed us from 
 the kingdom of Satan, and the perpetual torments of hell; it does not 
 wish us to know when and at what point of time he descended to those 
 in hell, otherwise it would have revealed it to us.") " Christ, after his 
 death, suffered nothing a't all ; but, during his lifetime, he endured the 
 pains of hell and in this sense he descended, illocally, into hell. In either 
 case, however, Christ exhibited himself as victorious and triumphant." 
 These two theologians were the occasion of having an article concern- 
 ing the descensus ad inferos inserted in the Form. Coxc. This contains, 
 however, no decisions concerning the questions agitated by these theo- 
 logians, but rather keeps aloof from useless inquiries, and limits itself 
 to the firm adherence to the confession that Christ, by his descent, " has 
 destroyed hell for all believers, and delivered them from the power of 
 death, of the devil, of eternal damnation, and of the jaws of hell." Form. 
 Conc. (Epit., IX): " There was a controversy concerning this article 
 among some theologians who profess the Augsburg Confession, as to 
 when and how our Lord Jesus Christ, as our Catholic faith testifies, 
 descended to those in hell, whether this were done before or after his 
 death. In addition it was asked whether he descended only by his soul 
 alone, or his divinity alone, or indeed by soul and body, and whether 
 this were done after a spiritual or after a bodily manner. It was also 
 disputed whether this article were to be referred to the passion , or indeed to 
 the glorious victory and triumph of Christ. But since this article of our 
 faith . . . can be comprehended neither by our senses nor reason, but 
 is to be received by faith alone, we unanimously advise that there be no 
 controversy concerning this matter, but that we believe and teach this 
 article with the greatest simplicity. . . . For we ought to be satisfied 
 to know that Christ has descended to those in hell, that he has destroyed 
 hell for all believers, that, by himself, he has delivered us from the 
 
406 STATE OF EXALTATION. 
 
 power of death and of Satan, from eternal damnation, and, therefore, 
 from the jaws of hell. But let us not curiously search into the manner 
 in which these things have been effected, but reserve the full knowledge 
 of this matter for another world." . . . 
 
 For the history of this article, see Frank : " The Theology of the 
 Form. Conc. (Ill, 1863) de descensu ad inferos," in whose words we 
 have cited the doctrines of Aepin (which he obtained, in part, from a 
 manuscript in the library at Wolfenbiittel), and Parsimonius. 
 
 Concerning the different explanations of the descensus ad inferos, 
 Grh. (I, 362): "Concerning the descensus ad inferos, the opinions of 
 the old and the more recent theologians greatly vary : (1) Some have 
 altogether omitted this article. Thus the several councils of Nice, 
 Constantinople, and Toledo have not mentioned it. (2) Clement, of 
 Alexandria, says that Christ and the apostles descended to those in hell 
 to preach the Gospel to the minds of the damned, and to carry to be- 
 lievers the hope of salvation. (3) Chrysostom refers the descensus ad 
 inferos to the power of working miracles, by wliich Christ raised many 
 from the dead. (4) Some in a general manner receive the descensus ad 
 inferos as referring to the entire state of humiliation (Sohnius). (5) 
 Some state that descending ad inferos is the same as being buried 
 (Bucer, Beza). (6) Some understand this descent with reference to 
 the pains which Christ suffered in his soul {Calvin). (7) Some under- 
 stand it with reference to the power and virtue of Christ's death ex- 
 tending even to the dead. We say with Luther that this article is not 
 to be treated with acuteness and anxious care, as to how it occurred, 
 and what the descensus ad inferos means, but the most simple opinion 
 must be retained, just as the words read. We believe,' therefore, that 
 Christ undoubtedly descended ad. inferos, . . . and that by himself he 
 has delivered us from the power of death and of Satan, from eternal 
 damnation, and, therefore, from the jaws of hell." 
 
 [25] Quen. (Ill, 377): " The term resurrection is received either 
 comprehensively, according as it is an official meritorious act, and be- 
 longs to both natures, or restrictedly, according as it is a change of state 
 of the human nature, resulting from exaltation ; not the former but the 
 latter signification has a place here. Just as he was nailed to the cross 
 and delivered over to death, not according to his divine nature, which 
 considered in itself is entirely free from suffering, but according to his 
 human nature ; so he was raised up by God not according to his divine, 
 but only according to his human nature. Yet, for this reason, the di- 
 vine nature is not altogether excluded from this act : for it has imparted 
 to the human nature the power to rise again, and has made its resurrec- 
 
HIS RESURRECTION. 407 
 
 tion of advantage to us, i. e., that the resurrection is the victor over 
 death, sin, and hell, and our justifier." 
 
 (Id., 378): " The material is the same body in substance and number 
 that endured the death of the cross, reunited with the soul, the same in 
 number which before had departed from it, but clothed with new quali- 
 ties, Phil. 3 : 21. . . . When the question is asked, ' What is the na- 
 ture of the body with which Christ rose again,' we reply: (1) Not 
 with a psychical (^x LK v) body, or one subject to natural infirmities, but 
 with a spiritual (nvevpaTiKG)} body, or one adorned with spiritual endow- 
 ments, namely, invisibility, impalpability, illocality, etc.; by virtue of 
 this endowment Christ penetrated the closed stone of the sepulchre, the 
 closed door, and did not stand in need of raiment and food ; the fact 
 mentioned in Luke 24 : 43, that he truly ate, occurred not from neces- 
 sity but from free will, not for the nourishment of his own body, as the 
 body neither stood in need of this nor admitted the same, but for the 
 strengthening of the faith of the disciples. (2) Not with a weak body, 
 but one strong and powerful. (3) Not with a corruptible body (such 
 Christ's body never was), but with an incorruptible and immortal body, 
 both as to act and as to power. (4) Not with a body having ignominy, 
 but with a glorious body, and hence the body of Christ is called c&fj-a 
 TwSS^avrov, Phil. 3:21." 
 
 The design of the resurrection, according to Holl. (783): 
 " Christ rose again in order to manifest the victory which he had ob- 
 tained over death and the devil, Acts 2 : 24 ; and to offer and apply to 
 all men the fruits of his passion and death." These fruits are: " The 
 confirmation of our faith concerning Christ's full satisfaction, 1 Cor. 15: 
 17 ; the application of the benefits obtained by the death of Christ, our 
 justification, Rom. 4 : 25 ; the sealing of our hope concerning our preser- 
 vation for salvation, 1 Pet. 1:3; our being raised again to life eternal, 
 John 11 : 25 ; 14:19; 2 Cor. 4:14; 1 Thess. 4 : 14, and our renewal, 
 Rom. 6:4; 2 Cor. 5:15." 
 
 [26] Quen. (Ill, 380): "Ascension is used either in a wide sense, 
 in so far as it includes the sitting at the right hand of God, as in Acts 
 2 : 33, 34 ; Eph. 4 : 10 ; or in a narrow sense, in so far as it denotes the 
 visible elevation of Christ on high, as Mark 16: 19 ; Acts 1 : 9, 11 ; the 
 latter is the signification in this article." 
 
 Quen. (Ill, 382): " Of the general goal of the ascension, the passa- 
 ges Mark 16 : 19 and Acts 1:11 speak. But the heaven into which 
 Christ ascended is not the aerial or sidereal heaven of nature, for to 
 think of this here is irreverent ; nor the heaven of grace (Holl. (785), 
 which is the church militant upon this earth, from which Christ has 
 
408 STATE OF EXALTATION. 
 
 withdrawn his visible presence until the day of judgment); not a glori- 
 ous state, whether of infinite glory, which pertains to the succeeding 
 article, the sitting at the right hand of God, or of finite glory, because 
 he was in this state immediately after the resurrection ; but the res- 
 idence, and home of the blessed, where he presents himself to the blessed 
 for them to look upon him face to face, and fills the souls of the saints 
 by his most joyful visible presence with divine and heavenly comfort, 
 John 14 : 2; Luke 23 : 43. The goal, properly speaking, is virepavwKavTuv 
 ovpavuv (above all heavens), Eph. 4 : 10, viz., at the very right hand of 
 God, at which he sat down, where v^rjldrepoq t&v ovpavuv yevd/iEvog (he is 
 made higher than the heavens), Heb. 7 : 26. We have a great High 
 Priest, says Paul, Heb. 4 : 14, dietyAvOdra rovg ovpavovg (that is passed 
 into the heavens)." Concerning the passage just cited, Grh. remarks, 
 " To penetrate the heavens is not to pass through a visible mechanism 
 of the heavens diversified by distinct circuits of spheres, so as to be con- 
 tained in the last heaven, as though, according to a physical sense, to be 
 circumscribed in a certain place ; but in accordance with scriptural lan- 
 guage, to become higher than all heavens, and to enter and take upon 
 himself divine glory." We have above proved that Christ ascended to 
 the where of the blessed. But since this is not a circumscribed and 
 physical locality, the ascension itself is not a local and physical passing 
 over to it. Christ is also in heaven, yet not according to local circum- 
 scription, but definitively and according to the manner of a glorified 
 body. Therefore the Calvinists do violence to the words of the apostle, 
 Acts 3 : 21, by interpreting to di^aadat passively, in this manner: "Whom 
 the heavens must receive," i. e. contain, inclose as an object comprised 
 within. Yet they wish this to be understood not concerning a violent 
 incarceration, but nevertheless concerning a local circumscription, or a 
 local occupation of heaven. But the active signification is favored (1) 
 by the original force of the verb de^aodai, for it is a purely deponent verb, 
 that is always active, never passive ; (2) by the construction, for in this 
 connection it is construed with the accusative ovpavbv, instead of which 
 for' ovpavov would have to be used ; (3) by parallel passages, for Peter's 
 expression in this connection, "the heaven must receive," the Holy 
 Ghost renders and declares by corresponding formulae thus, viz., that he 
 sat down kic- detjicw tov deov, Mark 16: 19; Eph. 1 : 20 ; (4) by the scope 
 of the text, which is to remove the stumbling-block of the Jews ; in 
 the two preceding verses Peter exhorts them to repent quickly. But 
 what is the reason offered ? Is it that Christ ought to be taken locally 
 into heaven, and, therefore, ye Jews ought to believe in him, and repent 
 quickly? A stronger argument is derived from the state of glorious 
 
HIS ASCENSION. 409 
 
 exaltation in this manner: " Christ has taken possession of a heavenly 
 and eternal kingdom, and everywhere present reigns with power; there- 
 fore this majesty and presence of so great a king it is proper that ye 
 should reverence and obey by speedy repentance ;" (5) I reason thus : 
 If Christ is received into heaven, so as to be able to be nowhere outside 
 of heaven, until the last day, as the Calvinists wish, he did not there- 
 fore ascend far above all heavens to fill all things, Eph. 4: 10, and 
 therefore he is not made higher than the heavens, Heb. 7 : 26. Hence 
 Christ's being in heaven, i. e., in the place of the blessed, according to 
 the mode of a true but glorified body, and his being carried up above 
 all heavens, even to the very right hand of God, by no means conflict 
 with each other, but can exist at the same time." 
 
 Grh. (XIX, 152) : " We in no wise affirm that the ascension of 
 Christ was an a<j>avicfj.og } disappearance or evanescence, or any mere 
 aopaaia [invisibility], just as before by divine virtue he had at different 
 times rendered himself invisible ; but we sincerely believe and confess 
 that Christ's avafyftg [being taken up] was a ronud) iitraaraaiq, a local 
 transfer, a visible elevation, a true and real ascension, by which Christ, 
 on Mount Olivet, was visibly lifted up on high from the earth, and, the 
 infirmities of this life being laid aside, was transferred to heaven, and 
 placed at the right hand of God, the ultimate goal of his ascension. But 
 what we deny is this, viz., that Christ, when the cloud had withdrawn 
 him from the eyes of the disciples, by a successive departure passed first 
 through a sphere of fire, and then through circles of planets and the 
 firmament, or the first movable and crystalline heaven, until in the pro- 
 gress of time he came to his Father in the empyreal heaven, in which, 
 residing in a local and bodily manner, he is held restrained from being 
 present upon earth in an invisible and illocal manner before the day of 
 judgment." 
 
 [27] Cf. Form. Conc, Sol. Dec, VIII, 28. Br. (487): "God's 
 right hand is not any definite place, but the omnipotent power of God 
 itself, which fills heaven and earth, Matt. 26 : 64 ; Ex. 15:6; Heb. 1 : 
 3 ; 8:1; 12:2; Eph. 1 : 20-23 ; Ps. 139 : 10." Holl. (787) : " To 
 sit at God's right hand means to use fully and incessantly the royal om- 
 nipotence and majesty imparted from the Father through the exaltation, 
 for universal and most glorious governing in the kingdom of power, 
 grace, and glory ; or, what is the same, to sit at God's right hand, is, 
 by virtue of the personal union and the exaltation following this, to gov- 
 ern all the w r orks of God's hands most powerfully, most efficaciously, 
 and most gloriously, 1 Cor. 15 : 25, 27 ; Ps. 110: 1, 2 ; Heb. 2 : 7, 8." 
 
 Grh. (Ill, 509) : "(a) The right hand of God. The sitting at the right 
 27 
 
410 STATE OF EXALTATION. 
 
 hand of God must be understood to be of like nature with the right hand 
 of God. But now the right hand of God is not a bodily, circumscribed 
 limited, definite place, but it is the infinite power of God and his most 
 efficacious majesty in heaven and earth ; it is that most efficacious do- 
 minion by which God preserves and governs all things. For thus the 
 right hand of God is described in Holy Scripture, that it has been mag- 
 nified in power, and breaks to pieces its enemies, Ex. 15:6; Ps. 18 : 
 35 ; 44 : 3 ; 108 : 6 ; 63 : 8, etc. From these and similar passages of 
 Scripture such a representation of God's right hand is inferred, as that 
 it is the infinite power of God, everywhere, in heaven and earth, most 
 efficaciously and most powerfully governing, controlling, and adminis- 
 tering all things. Hence it is also called the right hand, Swdfieug, of 
 power, Matt. 26: 64; Luke 22: 69; and the right hand of majesty, 
 Heb. 1:3; the throne jueyaTiuavv^g t 8:1; the right hand of the throne 
 of God, 12: 2 ; the throne of his glory, Matt. 25 : 31. Therefore the 
 sitting at God's right hand is to be explained and understood in such a 
 manner as that through it participation in divine pow T er, majesty, and 
 dominion in heaven and earth are understood." 
 
 " (b) Sitting at God's right hand. This is most correctly and simply 
 explained according to that manner and sense in which Scripture itself 
 explains the sitting at God's right hand. But now Scripture itself ex- 
 plains the sitting at God's right hand as the most efficacious and power- 
 ful dominion of heaven and earth. Therefore, etc. The minor premise 
 is proved by a comparison of passages, Ps. 110 : 1 ; the apostle, citing 
 this passage, 1 Cor. 15 : 25, thus infers: 'He must reign till he hath 
 put all enemies under his feet.' What sitting at the right hand of God 
 is to David, that the reigning and having all things under him is to the 
 apostle. Thus Mark 16 : 19 : 'The Lord Jesus was received up into 
 heaven, and sat on the right hand of God.' With this passage we com- 
 pare the expression of the apostle in Eph. 4 : 10. Therefore to sit at 
 + ,he right hand of God and to fill all things, t. e., the presence of maj- 
 esty, are convertible terms. And because the power and presence of 
 majesty exercise themselves in a special way through works of grace, in 
 the collection, preservation, and protection of the Church, therefore, 
 according to Mark 16: 20, the consequence is, the 'apostles preached 
 everywhere, the Lord working with them,' and, according to Paul, 
 Eph. 4 : 11, ' he gave some apostles,' etc., and 4 : 8 precedes, ' he gave 
 gifts to men.' Peter, likewise, Acts 2 : 33, states that the miraculous 
 outpouring of the Holy Ghost was a fruit and consequence of this sitting 
 at the right hand of God, ' Being by the right hand of God exalted, 
 and having received of the Father the .promise of the Holy Ghost, he 
 
SITTING AT GOD'S RIGHT HAND. 411 
 
 hath shed forth this which ye now see.' The emphatic description of 
 the sitting at the right hand of God given by Paul, Eph. 1 : 20, seq., 
 and by Peter, 1 Pet. 3 : 22, are especially to be noted. Take notice 
 that in the latter words, 'He gave him to be head over all things to the 
 Church,' this presence and power to the Church is not limited or re- 
 stricted, but by these are described the effect and fruit of the dominion 
 over all things conferred upon Christ. For, as God preserves the whole 
 world because of the Church, so also the divine power and majesty are 
 imparted to Christ, according to his human nature, in order that he may 
 be king and protector of the Church. Finally, this also must be noticed, 
 that Christ, when he Mill come in the clouds of heaven to judgment, 
 will nevertheless sit upon the seat of his majesty, and the right hand of 
 God's power, Matt, 24: 30; 25: 31; 26: 64. Therefore, the right 
 hand of God is not any finite and circumscribed place in heaven; other- 
 wise Christ coming in the clouds to judgment would no longer sit at the 
 right hand of God. Likewise, all men are to be brought before his 
 judgment-seat, and to see Christ as their judge, Zech. 12: 10; Matt. 
 24 : 30 ; Rev. 1 : 7. But if Christ, with his glorified body, personally 
 united to the loyog, and taken up to the right hand of God, were so con- 
 fined to a determinate place in heaven that he could not be present and 
 be seen except in that one place, how could all men, innumerable in 
 multitude, see him in that one place at one and the same time ? If the 
 seat of majesty on which Christ will sit when he comes to judgment has 
 been removed so many miles from earth, how will all men, at one and 
 the same view, be able to see him ?" 
 
 It is here to be observed that this sitting at the right hand of God is 
 described as the last and highest act of the exaltation ; hence Chmn. 
 (Loc. Th.) remarks : " Scripture, therefore, explains Christ's sitting at 
 the right hand of God the Father Almighty, as referring to the exalta- 
 tion of the human nature in Christ to the highest majesty and power 
 over all things." Rightly, therefore, Quen. also, in harmony with all 
 the Dogmaticians, remarks (III, 385) : "The subject sitting at the right 
 hand of God is the incarnate loyog. Matt. 26 : 64; Mark 14: 62 ; Luke 
 22 : 69. The subject by which he sits, is human nature, Rom. 8 : 34; 
 Phil. 2 : 8, 9 ; Rev. 5 : 9, 12, 13. This is proved . . . from the pre- 
 ceding self-renunciation and subsequent exaltation of Christ. Accord- 
 ing to that same nature, in which Christ was first humbled and after- 
 wards exalted, he sits at the right hand of God ; but Christ was first 
 humbled and afterwards exalted, not according to his divinity, but only 
 according to his humanity; for only the latter is capable of self-renun- 
 ciation and exaltation." It is to this sitting that the remark of Holl. 
 
412 THE STATE OF EXALTATION. 
 
 refers (788) : "Holy Scripture ascribes the sitting at God's right hand, 
 it is true, to Christ's entire person, but according to his human nature;" 
 i. e., the thing itself, the sitting at the right hand of God, is ascribed, 
 indeed, to the entire person, but an exaltation, such as is implied in the 
 conception of "sitting at the right hand of God," can be predicated only 
 of the human nature of Christ, for only this is capable of it. The Dog- 
 maticians are so in the habit of associating the conception of exaltation 
 with that of the "sitting," that, in this connection, they make a further 
 distinction between "sitting at God's right hand, and reigning." Quen. 
 (Ill, 384) : " To sit at the right hand of God the Father, is not alto- 
 gether the same as to reign with God the Father. For (1) Christ while 
 yet aoapnog [unincarnate] reigned with the Father and Holy Ghost from 
 eternity, yet he did not then sit at God's right hand ; for this sitting first 
 began from the time of exaltation. (Christ as God, together with the 
 Father and Holy Ghost, reigns from eternity by means of his essential 
 omnipotence; Christ as man, or according to his assumed human nature, 
 reigns not from eternity, but from the time of his exaltation, through his 
 sitting at the right hand of God. Mentzer shows this acccurately in 
 Anti-Martin, where he admonishes that the major premise* [*'. e., 'to 
 sit at the right hand of God is to reign,' vide note] which receives the 
 word, to rule, in too general a sense, is to be thus restricted : to sit at 
 the right hand of God is to reign, namely, in such a manner that the sit- 
 ting at the right hand of God is the cause, manner, and mode of the reign 
 itself. (2) To reign with the Father is an aTroreXeajua [act] of the royal 
 office, issuing from the power and evepyeia [virtue] of Christ's two na- 
 tures ; but to sit at the right hand of God the Father is not such a 
 result." 
 
 [Reformed theologians, when not treating the doctrine of the Lord's 
 Supper, often reach the same conclusions, or closely approach them (as 
 may be seen from the following citations in Heppe's Dogmatik (1861, 
 pp. 364, sq.): Leidener : "The right hand of God here cannot be 
 received literally, since God is a spirit, and, accordingly, has not flesh 
 and bones ; and is taken metaphorically for the highest degree of glory, 
 to which, after his passion and ascension, Christ was raised by the 
 Father." Rns. : "The session at the right hand of God can be under- 
 stood not properly and literally, but figuratively and metaphorically, in 
 order to designate the supreme dignity and power of Christ; the meta- 
 
 * [This cannot be understood without a reference to the context of Quen., a 
 portion of which Schmid here omits. It is this: "Martinius, the Calvinist, argues 
 in this wise: 'To sit at the right hand of God is to reign. But Christ reigns 
 according to both natures. Therefore — ' "] 
 
THE APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION. 413 
 
 phor being derived from the custom of kings, who are wont to put at 
 their right hands those to whom they concede a degree both of honor 
 and power in governing next themselves. This phrase is understood ot 
 the nearest degree of honor in 1 Kings 2 : 19, where Solomon, to show his 
 mother especial honor, puts her at his right hand ; and in Ps. 45 : 10, the 
 wife of the king, i. e., the Church, is said to stand on the right hand of 
 the Messiah. It is also used of power, or the administration of govern- 
 ment, Matt. 10 : 21, where the mother of Zebedee's sons asks that they 
 may sit on his right and left in his kingdom, i. e., hold the highest offices. 
 Hence, by the session at the right hand of God, two things especially are 
 designated: 1. Supreme majesty and glory, whereby God supremely 
 exalted him, and through which he received a name above every name, 
 Phil. 2:9, 10. 2. Supreme power, which he powerfully exercises to- 
 wards all creatures, and especially displays in the government and de- 
 fence of the Church." Heidegger: " To sit is here a sign of honor 
 and power." Bocan: " But did he not always reign with the Father, 
 and thus does he not perpetually sit at the right hand of the Father ? 
 He reigned indeed, but purely as God, without flesh. But afterwards 
 in time, as God clothed in flesh, after the completion of the period of his 
 humiliation, he began to sit at the right hand of the Father, i. e., to reign 
 in heaven and earth. When did he begin to sit at the right hand of the 
 Father? By right, from the very first moment of the hypostatic union ; 
 but actually or in fact, since his passion, resurrection and ascension."] 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 Of the Grace of the Holy Spirit in the Application of 
 
 Redemption. - 
 
 § 39. Preliminary Remarks. 
 
 "T3EFORE passing on to the consideration of the subject next 
 ■*-* in order, we preface the remark, that a number of dogmatic 
 topics, belonging in this connection, were not further developed 
 until by the later Dogmaticians, and were by them for the first 
 time assigned a special place in the system ; these are the topics 
 of Vocation, Illumination, Conversion and Regeneration, Mystical 
 Union and Renovation, which all the earlier Dogmaticians men- 
 
414 THE APPLICATION OF EEDBMPTION. 
 
 tion only occasionally, and usually in the section concerning 
 Free Will, bat have not more fully elaborated. Not until the 
 time of Cal. did the Dogmaticians begin to arrange these topics 
 together: by so doing they seek to collect, under one general 
 topic, all that is to be said concerning what God, or, more accur- 
 ately, the Holy Ghost, does, in order to induce fallen man to 
 accept of salvation through Christ, and what takes place in order 
 to bring about the designed change in man From the time of 
 Quen. this was all embraced under the head, The Grace of the 
 Holy Spirit in the Application of Redemption. [1] It cannot be 
 denied that thereby an advance was made in the systematic de- 
 velopment of Dogmatics; and, as the earlier Dogmaticians did 
 so little towards giving definite shape to the conceptions here 
 in question, we find ourselves limited to the later Dogmati- 
 cians for our statements in illustration of this subject. Yet the 
 introduction of an independent development of these conceptions 
 led to an arrangement of the entire doctrine which we cannot call 
 a happy one. After the above mentioned topics, to which that 
 of justification is attached, have been treated under the head of, 
 " The Grace of the Holy Spirit in the application of Redemption," 
 they discuss faith and good works (Holl. adding, besides, that of 
 penitence), but only after the doctrines concerning the Divine 
 Word and the Sacraments ; and they distinguish these [faith and 
 good works] as the means of salvation on the part of man, from 
 the Word and the Sacraments as the means of salvation on the 
 part of God. [2] According to this arrangement we meet with 
 especially this difficulty, that the full discussion of the doctrine of 
 faith is delayed so long. If we were not, indeed, justified in de- 
 parting from this arrangement for the reason that, since our task 
 is simply historical fidelity, and we have no other interest to 
 serve, yet from another quarter a reason arises that does justify 
 us in so departing. For, according to the arrangement intro- 
 duced by the later Dogmaticians, the articles concerning justifi- 
 cation and faith, which had been so closely connected together 
 at the time of the Reformation, and by the earlier Dogmaticians, 
 are too widely separated; as, upon the whole, the topics formerly 
 placed in the foreground here find (though it be only in the ar- 
 rangementj a less favorable place. And, as we regard ourselves 
 
ACTS OF APPLYING GRACE. 415 
 
 called upon to pay equal attention to the earlier and to the later 
 Dogmaticians, we think we are compelled to deviate from the 
 arrangement employed by the later Dogmaticians, if for no other 
 reason, simply to do equal justice to both classes. For this rea- 
 son, therefore, and not with the view of originating a more ex- 
 cellent dogmatic arrangement (for that is not our mission), we 
 adopt the plan qf treating first of Faith and Justification (both of 
 which may be comprehended under the topic of, " The Grace of 
 the Holy Spirit in the application of Kedemption," since both are 
 effected only through the power of the Holy Spirit), and after 
 that, of Vocation, Illumination, Conversion and Regeneration, 
 Mystical Union and Renovation ; so that we may be regarded as 
 treating first of the topics with which the earliest Dogmaticians 
 commenced their discussion of this general subject, and then 
 proceeding to treat of the topics more fully elaborated by the 
 later Dogmaticians. 
 
 [1] Quex. (Ill, 461) defends the arrangement thus : "The Triune 
 God is very desirous of our salvation, and all the three persons of the 
 Godhead are actively engaged in securing our eternal salvation. God 
 the Father appointed everlasting happiness and the peace of heaven for 
 us, of his own most gracious will and in his eternal counsel ; Christ, the 
 Son of man and of God, purchased for us the appointed salvation by his 
 blood-bought redemption, and the Holy Spirit offers ami applies the 
 purchased salvation and spiritual blessings through the Word and Sacra- 
 ments. As we have hitherto considered the grace of the Father's com- 
 miseration and love, and the grace of the fraternal redemption, it remains 
 for us to treat of the applying grace of the Spirit, which is completed in 
 several distinct acts." (Holl. (791): "The applying grace of the Holy 
 Spirit is the source of those divine acts by which the Holy Spirit, through 
 the Word of God and the Sacraments, dispenses, offers to us, bestows 
 and seals the spiritual and eternal favors designed for man by the great 
 mercy of God the Father, and procured by the fraternal redemption of 
 Jesus Christ.") 
 
 [2] This arrangement is employed by nearly all the later Dogmati- 
 cians, some of them slightly changing the order of the topics. Br. 
 alone considers faith and works separately from the means of salvation. 
 His plan is this: after the Offices of Christ, he introduces Faith in 
 Christ, Regeneration and Conversion, Justification, Renovation, and 
 Good AVorks. Holl. subjoins to the articles concerning calling, ilium- 
 
416 THE APPLICATION - OF REDEMPTION. 
 
 mating, converting, regenerating, justifying, indwelling and renewing 
 grace, the following, viz., preserving grace, (Holl. (963): " Preserva- 
 tion is that act of grace by which the Holy Spirit, dwelling in justified 
 and renewed men, defends them by supernatural strength against the 
 temptations of the devil, the world, and the flesh, which solicit to sin 
 and apostasy from God, and sustains and increases their faith and holi- 
 ness, that they may not fall from grace, but persevere in it and be eter- 
 nally saved ;") and glorifying grace (Holl. (790): "Glorification is 
 the act of grace by which God transfers those who are justified, and who 
 remain faithful until death, from the kingdom of grace to the kingdom 
 of glory, that they may obtain eternal happiness and praise God eter- 
 nally.") 
 
 The earlier Dogmaticians treat only of Justification, Faith, Good 
 Works, Repentance, and Confession, without attempting a systematic 
 arrangement, and in the free form of unconnected topics, as had been 
 done by Melanchthon. 
 
 § 40. The Agent, the Means, the Result. 
 
 As it was Christ who accomplished the work of redemption, 
 so it is the Holy Spirit who offers us the means whereby we can 
 appropriate that redemption to ourselves. The means is Faith, 
 the effect of faith is Justification. 
 
 § 41. I. Faith. 
 
 After reconciliation with God has been brought about through 
 Christ, inasmuch as, in man's stead, he fulfilled the law and made 
 satisfaction for the sins of the world, thenceforward this new sal- 
 vation is preached unto men, and through it the forgiveness of 
 sin is offered to them (Luke 24: 47; Acts 2: 38; 5: 31; 10: 
 43; 13: 38: 26: 18). To become a partaker of it, there is now 
 no need of any meritorious work on the part of man, for Christ 
 has done everything that was necessary to secure it; but this 
 alone is necessary, that man receive the salvation that is offered 
 him, and that he appropriate to himself the promise that is given; 
 and this is done alone by faith. [1] Man cannot, however, attain 
 this faith unless, after the redemption purchased by Christ has 
 been preached and offered to him, he recognize the existence of 
 this salvation, and the truth of this promise, as well as the com- 
 fort it contains for him, and can have the confidence that this 
 
ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF FAITH. 417 
 
 salvation is designed, not for this or that one alone, but also for 
 himself; for a joyful message can benefit a man only when he 
 has no doubt of its truth, but can convince himself that he, too, 
 is meant by it. [2] 
 
 Faith, considered with reference to its individual elements, 
 consists accordingly of — 
 
 1. "Knowledge, and that explicit, of things to be believed, es- 
 pecially concerning Christ and his merit, and concerning the 
 grace of God, or the remission of sins, and concerning the salva- 
 tion to be obtained thereby from God." Br. (503). [3] 
 
 2. "Assent, i. e., an approving judgment of the intellect, by 
 which we believe that those things which the Scriptures say con- 
 cerning Christ and his merit and atonement for our sins, and 
 concerning the grace of God and the promises of the free forgive- 
 ness of our sins for Christ's sake, are certainly and indubitably 
 true, and by which we absolutely acquiesce in them." [1] Quen. 
 (IY, 283). 
 
 3. "Confidence, an act by which the will rests in Christ, the 
 Mediator, both as our present good and the cause of another 
 good, namely, the remission of sins and the attainment of eternal 
 life." Br. (506). [5] 
 
 None of these elements dare be wanting, and no one of them 
 alone constitutes the faith of which we here speak. [6] A real 
 knowledge of the promises is essential to faith, and a mere in- 
 formal or implicit faith (such as says that it believes what the 
 Church believes) is not sufficient, but there must be an explicit 
 faith. [7] Faith consists, further, not in the mere recognition 
 and crediting of that which is promised, while the person may 
 be inwardly indifferent towards it {fides historica), and it is there- 
 fore not sufficient simply to regard as true the preaching of sal- 
 vation. Therefore is neither a general assent sufficient (a belief, 
 in general, that God is just and merciful, and has sent his Son 
 into the world as Kedeemer, but without any specific application 
 of these truths, James 2 : 19; ; but the assent must be special (in 
 which the sinner decides that these general promises apply to 
 himself individually). [8] Finally, salvation becomes really one's' 
 own when he truly and with confidence embraces it and appro- 
 priates it to himself; and this last mentioned is, therefore, to be 
 regarded as the most essential element of faith. [9] 
 
418 THE APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION. 
 
 Faith is, accordingly, the firm confidence which any one has 
 attained that he dare trust- in the salvation of Christ. [10] As 
 such it is called special, also saving or justifying faith, [11] and 
 it is the only means whereby we become partakers of salvation. 
 [12] But this faith man cannot beget within himself, in any 
 manner, by his own power : for man's natural want of confidence 
 in God can be overcome only by God himself. If, therefore, a 
 man believe, this faith is to be regarded as a work of God in 
 him, [13] and the Word and Sacraments are the means which 
 God employs for this purpose. [14] ' 
 
 But where such faith is wrought by God in man, there also, 
 along with it, there has occurred a moral transformation; for he 
 who has not recognized the comfort that is embraced in the 
 offered salvation would not think of embracing it ; but this com- 
 fort presupposes knowledge of sin and abhorrence of it ; where, 
 therefore, this faith exists, there is always along with it a dispo- 
 sition towards that which is good ; [15] and this so necessarily, 
 that where this is wanting we may assume that the faith is not 
 of the right kind, and that the offered salvation has not really 
 been appropriated. (Saving faith is true and living, not false or 
 dead.) [16] But it must here be carefully noted, that although 
 we cannot conceive of faith unaccompanied by a moral dispo- 
 sition, yet the latter is only something that in the very nature of 
 things accompanies faith; but salvation itself can be attained 
 only through hearty confidence. The moral disposition is, there- 
 fore, in no sense the ground upon which salvation through Christ 
 is imparted to men. [17] As, finally, there is no lack of indica- 
 tions whereby a man can recognize the existence of faith in him- 
 self, he may thoroughly satisfy himself whether the true faith 
 that justifies has been wrought in him; [18] and this is designated 
 as stronger or weaker, just in proportion'to the strength or weak- 
 ness of the confidence with which he embraces the offered sal- 
 vation. [19] 
 
 Br. (502) : "Although through the passion and death of Christ there 
 was truly offered whatever of satisfaction there could be demanded from 
 all the men in the world, for the extinction of the debt incurred through 
 their offences, and thus to appease God and reconcile them to himself; 
 nevertheless, God wished that sinners should acknowledge the satisfac- 
 
FAITH, SUBJECTIVE AND OBJECTIVE. 419 
 
 tion offered to him for them by the Son of God, and make it their own 
 by faith ; and so he wished that whoever embraces the Saviour by faith 
 may enjoy his merit." Faith, in this sense, is "subjective, or that by 
 which one believes (faith, properly so called, which dwells in a believing 
 man as a subject), and, as such, is distinguished from objective faith, or 
 that which is believed (which is the doctrine of faith, and which is 
 figuratively called faith, because it is the object of faith. Acts 6:7; 
 13 : 8; 16 : 5 ; Rom. 12: 7)." 
 
 [2] Ap. Conf. (II, 48) : "The faith which justifies is not merely 
 historical knowledge, but assent to the promise of God, in which remis- 
 sion of sins and justification are freely offered through Christ. Lest any 
 one should suppose that it is mere knowledge, Ave add further, it is to 
 wish to receive the proffered remission of sins and justification — 81. 
 Thus we are reconciled to the Father and receive the forgiveness of sins 
 when we exercise confidence in the mercy promised in Christ." 
 
 Chmn. (Loc. c. Th., II, 270) : 1. " The Scripture calls faith knowl- 
 edge* {yv&aig), Luke 1 : 77 ; Col. 2:3; Eph. 3:19. To faith must be 
 presented, and upon it enforced, from the Word of God, the decree and 
 history of redemption, the gratuitous and universal promise that God, 
 on account of that victim, desires to receive sinners who betake them- 
 selves by faith to the Mediator. 2. Because many who hear these things 
 and understand and know them, either neglect, or doubt, or resist, turn 
 away from and oppose, it is necessary that assent should be united to 
 this knowledge : not merely a general one, but that by which each 
 one determines with firm persuasion, which Paul calls assurance 
 {■Klrjpoipopia [Heb. 10: 22]), that the universal promise belongs privately, 
 individually, and specifically to him, and that he also is included in the 
 general promise. 3. Then, after this knowledge and assent (which are 
 in the mind), the heart or the will, under the Spirit's influence, experi- 
 ences such an inward groaning or desire, that, because it feels griev- 
 ously the burden of its sins and of the anger of God, it wills, seeks for, 
 and asks that those blessings which are offered in the promise of the 
 Gospel may be granted. ... 4. When, in this way, thou turnest thy- 
 self, with mind, will, and heart, from the contemplation of sin, and the 
 consciousness of the wrath of God, and lookest unto the Lamb of God, 
 w T ho taketh away the sins of the world ; i. e., when, from the sentence 
 of damnation, which is denounced against thee by the law, thou fleest 
 to the throne of grace and to the propitiation which our Heavenly 
 Father offered in the blood of Christ, it is necessary to superadd confi- 
 
 * [Notitiam et scientiam.] 
 
420 THE APPLICATION OF EEDEMPTION. 
 
 dence, which, with full assurance, determines from the Word of God, 
 that God then gives, communicates, and applies to thee the benefits of 
 the promise of grace, and that thou thus truly apprehendest and receiv- 
 est, unto justification, salvation, and eternal life, those things which the 
 gratuitous promise of the Gospel offers." 
 
 [3] Br. (503) : " Belief can take place only in regard to those things 
 which are mentally conceived or embraced in simple apprehension. 
 Hence, knowledge is commonly regarded as the first step of faith, or the 
 first part or the beginning of faith. That knowledge is necessary to 
 faith in Christ, is proved by John 6: 69; 17: 3; Luke 1 : 77 ; Acts 
 17 : 23, 30 ; Eph. 4:18; Gal. 4 : 9." 
 
 [4] Quen. (IV. 283) : " The second act of faith (viz., assent) is 
 more distinctive than the first (viz., knowledge), for even heretics may 
 have knowledge and yet not yield assent to the Word that is known. 
 But this assent is not superficial, doubting, vacillating, but should be 
 decided and strong, on which account it is called the evidence of things 
 not seen, Heb. 11 : 1. This act of faith does not depend upon the evi- 
 dence of things, or upon the knowledge of causes and properties, but 
 upon the infallible authority of God's Word." 
 
 [5] Holl. (1178): " Confidence is an act of the will, by which the 
 sinner, converted and regenerate, earnestly desires and seeks the 
 mercy of God, secured by Christ's merit, and embraces him both as his 
 own present good, and as the cause of the forgiveness of sins and of 
 eternal salvation, relies upon him against all terrors, and securely re- 
 clines and rests upon him." 
 
 Quen. (IV, 284): " Thus confidence is nothing else than the accept- 
 ance or apprehension of the merit of the God-man, appropriating it to 
 ourselves individually. The following passages indicate the apprehension: 
 John 1: 5,12; 17: 8; Rom. 5 : 17 ; Gal. 3: 14; Luke 8 : 13 ; Acts 
 8 : 14; James 1 : 21 ; Acts 10 : 43 ; 1 Tim. 1 : 15. Appropriation is 
 indicated by the applicative and possessive pronouns my, me, mine, as 
 is evident from Job 19 : 25 ; Is. 45 : 24 ; John 20 : 28 ; Gal. 2 : 20 seq. 
 It belongs, therefore, to confidence, to seek Christ, Is. 55 : 6; Amos 5 : 
 4; earnestly to seek, Ps. 42 : 1, 2; to apprehend him with his right- 
 eousness, Rom. 9 : 30 ; to embrace him with all acceptation, 1 Tim. 1: 
 15; to appropriate his merit to oneself, Gal. 3 : 26; Phil. 1 : 21 ; and 
 sweetly to rest in him, Rom. 4: 21 ; Heb. 10 : 22. This apprehension 
 belongs to the will and is practical ; it involves the reclining of the 
 whole heart and will upon the merit of Christ; it denotes desire for and 
 access to Christ, and the application and confident appropriation of his 
 merit, and this is truly confidence." 
 
FAITH, EXPLICIT AND IMPLICIT. 421 
 
 [6] Br. (508): " This, therefore, is the faith which is said to appre- 
 hend Christ or his merit, particularly as it is assent with confidence, or 
 confidence joined with assent, consisting of these acts united, and is 
 designated now by the name of the former, and then by that of the lat- 
 ter, the other always being implied. Whence it appears how faith ex- 
 ists in different faculties ; in the understanding and will, namely, as 
 something compounded and united in divers acts directed to the same 
 object, and preserving a certain order amongst each other and towards 
 that one and the same object." 
 
 Holl. (1166): "Faith is in the intellect with respect to knowledge 
 and assent; in the will with respect to confidence." 
 
 Quen. (IV, 282); " These three parts of faith are expressed by John 
 14: 10, 11, 12, where verse ten speaks of knowledge, verse eleven of 
 assent, and verse twelve of confidence." The three constituents of faith 
 are conveyed in the phrases credere Deum, credere Deo and credere in 
 Deum. " Credere Deum signifies, to believe that God exists; credere 
 Deo signifies, to believe that those things which he speaks are true ; 
 credere in Deum signifies, by believing to love, by believing to go to him, 
 by believing to cling to him, to be incorporated into his members. 
 Heretics can ha\e the first, the second the orthodox alone, the third the 
 regenerate, and therefore the latter always includes the former, but this 
 order cannot be reversed. The former two pertain to the intellect, the 
 third to the will ; the first and second have respect to the entire Word 
 of God, the third to the promise of grace and the merit of Christ." 
 (Quen., ib.) 
 
 [7 J Br. (503): *' Explicit faith is that by which the thing to be be- 
 lieved, although it be not clearly known, or although all the things in 
 it that are cognizable be not intelligibly apprehended, yet is itself known 
 distinctly, or in such a manner that it can be distinguished from other 
 objects. With this is contrasted an implicit knowledge by which any 
 one, e. g., is said to believe that Christ is the Redeemer, when he be- 
 lieves that those things are true which the Church believes, although 
 he has no knowledge whatever as to what those things are which the 
 Church believes." 
 
 [8] Holl. (1178): " By general assent, the universal promises of the 
 grace of God and the merit of Christ are regarded as true. By special 
 assent, the converted, regenerate sinner regards these general promises 
 as pertaining to him individually. In 1 Tim. 1 : 15, the general and spe- 
 cial assent of faith are united. By the general assent it is admitted as 
 true that Christ Jesus came into the world to save all sinners. From 
 this universal proposition the apostle descends to himself in particular, 
 
422 THE APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION. 
 
 and believes that he has on Christ's account obtained the mercy of God 
 to salvation. From this it appears that Christ's merit is universal, and 
 the promises concerning the gratuitous remission of sins to be obtained 
 through Christ are indeterminate. But that they may become actually 
 profitable to one or another individual, it is necessary that the universal 
 merit of Christ, and the indeterminate promises, should be applied and 
 determined by special assent to this or that penitent sinner." 
 
 [9] Quen. (IV, 284, from Chmn., ex.): " It may be proved that con- 
 fidence is the principal part of faith. (1) From etymology. Faith and 
 confidence (fides and fiducia, nioTig- and Tre7roi'&7]Gcg-^ have one and the 
 same origin ; both come from a Greek word (irei-&u) 9 which means I per- 
 suade, 1 convince, cf. John 2 : 24." (" From a comparison of passages 
 in the Old and New Testaments, What in the Old Testament is attrib- 
 uted to those exercising trust, and to confidence, in the New Testament 
 is applied to those believing, and to faith." Holl. (1182) ). (2) From 
 synonymies. Faith. Heb. 11 : 1, is called substance (vwoaracyig), which 
 denotes a confidence of the heart subsisting firmly and immovably. 
 (Comp. Ps. 39 : 4 ; 2 Cor. 9:4; 11:17; Heb. 3:14.) Faith is also 
 called confidence (ireiroi&ijoig) , 2 Cor. 3:4; Eph. 3 : 12 : a sure and 
 immovable persuasion (TrA^po^opm), Rom. 4: 20, 21 ; Col. 2 : 2; Heb. 10: 
 22 ; boldness (napfaoia), Eph. 3 : 12 ; 1 John 3 : 21 ; 4 : 17. (3) From ex- 
 planatory declarations. Faith is represented by the reception of Christ, 
 John 1:12; by the apprehension of the merit of Christ, Rom. 3 : 30 ; 
 by confidence, 1 John 5:13; Matt. 9 : 22 ; 15 : 28 ; 1 John 5 : 4. (4) 
 From explicit declarations, in which faith must be regarded as confi- 
 dence, as in Matt. 9:22; 15:28; 1 John 5:4. (5) From what are 
 represented as its opposites. To faith is opposed hesitation, Rem. 4 : 20; 
 James 1:6; Luke 8 : 50 ; Mark 5:34; Matt. 8 : 26 ; 14 : 31. (6) From 
 reason. For that by which justifying faith is constituted and distin- 
 guished from other species of faith, is its essential element; but, by the 
 confidential reception of Christ and his merit, justifying faith is consti- 
 tuted, John 1:12; Rom. 3 : 25 ; and is distinguished from an historical 
 faith, James 2:19; and a miraculous faith, which regards another kind 
 of promise, Mark 16 : 16 ; therefore," etc. 
 
 [Chemnitz, Examen (Preuss' ed. I: 192), much fuller: 
 " 1. From the nature and property of a gratuitous promise. For my 
 confidence in my salvation does not depend upon the fact that the per- 
 spicacity of my understanding, by its acuteness, can penetrate the 
 heaven of heavens, and scrutinize what is decreed concerning me in the 
 secret counsel of the Trinity, but that God coming forth from his secret 
 light, has revealed his will to us in his word, as Paul in 2 Cor. 2: 16 
 
CONFIDENCE THE CHIEF PART OF FAITH. 423 
 
 does not hesitate to affirm that 'we have the mind of Christ.' If eternal 
 life were to be apprehended by doubt, no promise would be more fitting 
 than that of the Law; for because of the condition of perfect fulfilment 
 attached, it leaves consciences in perpetual doubt. But since it is not 
 doubt, but faith which justifies, and not he who doubts, but he who be- 
 lieves, has eternal life; God has set forth the gratuitous promise of the 
 Gospel, which depends not on our works, but on the mercy of God, be- 
 cause of the obedience of his Son, our Mediator. Why this promise 
 was set forth, Paul shows: 'To the end that the promise might be sure,' 
 Eom. 4: 16. But does he mean that it should be sure only in general, 
 and of itself? In no wise, but, as he says, that it might be sure to all 
 the seed. But how? It was written, he says, to whom it shall be im- 
 puted if we believe v. 24. For the promise of the Law is in general,' 
 and of itself, sure. But in order that it might be sure to us, it is ac- 
 cording to grace, and of faith. So in Heb. 6, we have that most com- 
 forting declaration that God added an oath to his gratuitous promise, 
 'that by two immutable things,' etc., 'that we who have fled for refuge 
 might have a strong; consolation.' From such foundation, John derives 
 his argument, 1 John 5: 10; and that by this he does not mean mere 
 general assent is clear from v. 13; 'That ye may know that ye have,' 
 etc. For if I believe in the Son of God, and yet doubt whether I have 
 eternal life, I do not believe the promise : ' He that believeth in the Son 
 of God, hath everlasting life.' 
 
 " 2. From the peculiar office of justifying Faith. John had a special 
 purpose, in saying of faith (1 John 3: 14): ' We know that we have 
 passed,' etc. (5: 1?): ' That ye may know that ye have.' In Heb. 6, 
 there occurs the most beautiful metaphor of the anchor. For when an 
 anchor falls upon treacherous ground, it cannot hold the ship securely; 
 but when upon a firm foundation, it holds it against all waves. So, he 
 says, the anchor of our hope has been cast into heaven itself, where 
 Christ our High Priest is, who grasps, holds and supports it, as he says 
 in John 10 : 28 ; Phil. 3:13.*** A most firm argument also against 
 doubt is that of 2 Cor. 13: 5. Notice that every one is to prove him- 
 self whether he be in the faith, and that they who do not acknowledge 
 that Christ is in them, are reprobates. 
 
 " 3. The doctrine concerning the use of the sacraments furnishes the 
 most consoling arguments concerning the certainty of the salvation of 
 believers. For it is certain that the Son of God has added, by his own 
 institution, to his promise of grace, the seals which are called sacra- 
 ments ; viz., that the promise of the gospel be presented not only in 
 general, but that, in the sacramental action, the general promise is 
 
424 THE APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION. 
 
 offered, applied, and sealed to every one using it in faith ; and that too, 
 so that the weakness of faith which can feebly sustain itself by a general 
 and naked promise, may be sustained and comforted by the efficacy of 
 the sacraments. Thus, Rom. 4, circumcision is called a seal of the 
 righteousness of faith. Gal. 3 : 27 : ' As many of you as have been bap- 
 tized into Christ,' etc. 1 Pet. 3 : 21 : ' Baptism is the answer of a good 
 conscience,' etc. In the use of the Lord's Supper, the Son of God ap- 
 plies : 'Take, eat,' etc. Of absolution, how precious the promise: 
 ' Whosoever sins,' etc. Christ says, Luke 7 : 30 : ' Thy faith hath 
 saved thee ; go in peace,' Matt. 9 : 2. 
 
 "4. From the testimonies of Scripture concerning the sealing of be- 
 lievers by the Holy Ghost, Eph. 1: 13; 2 Cor. 1 : 22 ; Eph. 4: 30. 
 For sealing is without controversy applied to those objects which we 
 want to be held without doubt by those to whom they belong. . . . 
 Nor is the sealing only a general persuasion, but that each one may de- 
 termine that the promise is firm and certain unto himself, and that, too, 
 in opposition to the doubt which naturally inheres in our minds." 
 
 Another term is arrhabo, a word of Hebrew origin, signifying a pledge 
 whereby suretyship is ratified and confirmed, not certainly that there 
 may be doubt concerning it, but that faith in it may be undoubted. . . 
 For since we are saved, but nevertheless by hope, Rom. 8, and mean- 
 time faith is agitated by various temptations, in order, therefore, that 
 we may not doubt concerning God's good will towards us, the forgive- 
 ness of sins, adoption, salvation, and eternal life, he has given us as a 
 pledge, not an angel, or any creature, but the Holy Spirit himself, con- 
 substantial with Father and Son, so that, against every doubt, we may 
 rest in the confidence of that salvation which shall be revealed in us. 
 These metaphors are explained elsewhere in manifest declarations, 1 
 John 5: 10; Rom. 8 : 16 ; Gal. 4: 6; 1 Cor. 2: 12; Eph. 1: 18. 
 
 " 5. From the examples of the saints : Abraham, Rom. 4 : 20 ; David, 
 Ps. 23 : 4 ; 27 : 1 ; 31 : 1 ; Paul, Rom. 8: 33 sqq. 
 
 " 6. Doubt conflicting with confidence, is reproved in Scripture, in 
 explicit terms, Matt. 6 : 30 ; 14: 31; Luke 12: 29 ; James 1:6. In 
 Rom. 14 : ' Whatsoever is not of faith,' and ' Whatever is of a doubt- 
 ful conscience,' are synonyms."] 
 
 [10] Faith can therefore equally well be defined as " Confidence in 
 mercy for Christ's sake, or assent to the promise of grace through 
 Christ, or apprehension of Christ, or the merit of Christ, or the confi- 
 dent and individual application of the doctrines of salvation rightly 
 learned from the Word of God, and approved with a firm consent, made 
 to obtain forgiveness of sins and eternal salvation through and on 
 account of Christ's merit." (Cf. note 1.) 
 
SPECIAL FAITH. 425 
 
 Holl. (1163): "Faith in Christ is the gift of the Holy Spirit, by 
 which the converted and regenerated sinner savingly recognizes, with 
 firm assent approves, and with unwavering confidence applies to him- 
 self the Gospel promise of the grace of God and of the forgiveness of 
 sins and eternal salvation, to be obtained through the atonement and 
 merit of Christ, so that he may be justified and eternally saved." 
 
 The object of special faith is, accordingly, Holl. (1166), " Christ 
 the Mediator, so far as he is offered to us in the promise of the Gospel 
 as t\\e meritorious cause of the grace of God and of the remission of 
 sins (1 John 2:2; Rom. 3 : 25 ; Acts 16 : 31) ; or, what is the same 
 thing, the grace of God, on account of the satisfaction of Christ, re- 
 mitting sin, and promised in the Gospel (Rom. 3 : 24) ; or, what is of 
 similar import, the Gospel promise concerning the grace of God, and 
 the remission of sins, to be obtained through the satisfaction of Christ 
 (Rom. 4 : 16 ; Gal. 3 : 22 ; 1 Tim. 1 : 15 "). Holl. (1167) remarks 
 further : " The object of confidence is the same in substance whether 
 you represent it as Christ the Mediator, or as grace bestowed on account 
 of Christ the Mediator. The difference lies only in the mode of con- 
 ception and expression." 
 
 [11] Special faith distinguished from general. Holl. (1164): 
 " General faith is that by which man, who needs salvation, believes all 
 things to be true which are revealed in the Word of God. Of this 
 species of faith we are not now speaking, because we are treating of 
 faith as the means of salvation, and therefore in reference to a special 
 or peculiar object, which has the power of recovering salvation lost by 
 sin, and in consideration of which, faith may be considered among the 
 means of salvation. Special faith is therefore that by which the sinner, 
 converted and regenerated, applies to himself individually the universal 
 promises in reference to Christ, the Mediator, and the grace of God ac- 
 cessible through him, and believes that God desires to be propitious to 
 him and to pardon his sins, on account of the satisfaction of Christ, 
 made for his and all men's sins. It is therefore called special faith, not 
 because it has any special promise as its object, which is made specially 
 to the believer, but on account of the application by which, under the 
 universal promise of the grace of God and the merit of Christ, it reaches 
 him individually. Ap. Conf. II, 44 : " This special faith, therefore, 
 by which an individual believes that for Christ's sake, his sins are re- 
 mitted him, and that for Christ's sake, God is reconciled and propitious, 
 obtains remission of sins and justifies us." On the relation of general 
 and special faith, Chmn. (Loc. c. Th., II, 268): "Justifying faith 
 (special) presupposes and includes general faith, which, with a firm per- 
 28 
 
426 APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION. 
 
 suasion, determines that those things are most certainly true which are 
 disclosed in the Word of God. For when this firm foundation totters, 
 then a firm confidence in the evangelical promise cannot be conceived, 
 nor can it be retained in time of trouble. Justifying faith has also 
 many properties in common with general." Against the objections of 
 Catholicism, he says : " The papists constantly traduce our doctrine, as 
 if we invented a partial faith which is not Catholic, because it may be 
 detached from the other articles of belief and the entire Word of God, 
 and restricted to the single item of Christ, the Mediator; as if the as- 
 sent to other parts of the Word of God were not necessary, but arbi- 
 trary. To refute this calumny, therefore, at the very beginning of the 
 definition, the declaration is made, that we do not exclude the other 
 parts of the heavenly doctrine when we say that the promise of grace 
 is the proper object of justifying faith. But as the sum, end, scope, 
 and goal of the entire Scriptures is Christ in his mediatorial office, so 
 faith, when it assents to the entire Word of God, regards the scope of 
 the entire Scriptures, and refers all the other articles to the promise of 
 grace." 
 
 [12] Form. Conc. (Sol. Dec, III, 38) : " It is faith alone, and 
 nothing else whatever, which is the means and instrument by which the 
 grace of God and the merit of Christ in the promise of the Gospel are 
 embraced, received, and applied to us." 
 
 Holl. (1173) : " For justifying faith is the receptive organ and, as it 
 were, the hand of the poor sinner, by which he applies and takes to 
 himself, lays hold of, and possesses those things which are proffered in 
 the free promise of the Gospel. God, the supreme Monarch, extends 
 from heaven the hand of grace, obtained by the merit of Christ, and in 
 it offers salvation. The sinner, in the abyss of misery, receives, as a 
 beggar, in his hand of faith, what is thus offered to him. The offer and 
 the reception are correlatives. Therefore the hand of faith, which 
 seizes and appropriates the offered treasure, corresponds to the hand of 
 grace which offers the treasure of righteousness and salvation." 
 
 [13] Form. Conc. (Sol. Dec, III, 10) : " Faith is the gift of God, 
 by which we apprehend aright Christ, our Redeemer, in the Gospel." 
 Grh. (VII, 162) : " We are so corrupted and depraved by sin, that we 
 not only need redemption, the pardon of sins, the gift of salvation and 
 eternal life, but that we also cannot of ourselves and from our own 
 power produce even faith through which *to become partakers of divine 
 grace and heavenly blessings. God, therefore, pitying us, acted as a 
 faithful physician, who not only carries medicine to the patient to cure 
 him, but in addition, if there be occasion, and the invalid cannot do it, 
 attends to the administration of it himself." 
 
FAITH OF INFANTS. 
 
 427 
 
 Quen. (IV, 281): "God is the principal efficient cause of saving 
 faith. John 6 : 29 ; Phil. 1 : 29. Hence faith is called the gift of 
 God, Eph. 2 : 8, and it is said to be of the operation of God, Col. 2 : 
 12. This shows that faith proceeds from God, who regenerates, and is 
 not the product of our own will ; it is not meritorious. It has its origin 
 in grace, not in nature ; it is adventitious, not hereditary ; supernatural, 
 not natural. That which,* in respect to its commencement, its increase, 
 and its completion, is from God, cannot depend upon our will and the 
 powers of nature. But faith is of God in its commencement, Phil. 2 : 
 13 ; 1 : 6 ; in its increase, Mark 9 : 24 ; Luke 17 : 5; and in its com- 
 pletion, Phil. 1:6; 2 Thess. 1: 11. Therefore, etc." Br: (721): 
 ■■ The moving internal cause is the goodness of God, or his mercy and 
 gratuitous favor (Phil. 1 : 29) ; the external is the merit of Christ." 
 
 [14] Ap. Conf., II, 73 : " We do not exclude the Word or the 
 Sacraments. We have said above that faith is conceived from the 
 Word, and we honor the ministry of the Word in the highest degree." 
 
 Grh. (VII, 163) : •■ He does not wish to produce faith in the hearts 
 of men immediately, or by enthusiastic raptures of the Holy Spirit, but 
 mediately by the preaching, hearing, and reading of the Word, and 
 meditation upon it. Therefore the instrumental cause of faith is the 
 preaching of the Word. The Holy Spirit not only offers in the Gospel 
 the vast benefits procured by the passion and death of Christ, but 
 operates also through the Word upon the hearts of men, and kindles in 
 them faith by which they embrace and apply to themselves the prof- 
 fered mercies." The difference in regard to the order in which the 
 Word and Sacraments influence adults and children is thus laid down 
 by Quen. (IV, 282): " The conferring means in adults are, first, the 
 Word preached, heard, read, and devoutly considered. John 17 : 20; 
 Rom. 10: 17; 1 Cor. 1: 21 ; 2 Cor. 4: 6; and afterwards the Sacra- 
 ments. In infants, however, Baptism is first as a source generating 
 faith." 
 
 Agreeably to this, Holl. (1186) distinguishes " faith (which essen- 
 tially and absolutely considered is one), in relation to the mode of 
 knowledge, as direct, which directly leads to Christ and the grace of 
 God afforded in him (for example, infants believe, but they cannot yet 
 prove their faith \_explorare fidem suani] for want of ripened judgment), 
 and as reflex and discursive, by which a man regenerated believes and 
 perceives that he believes, so that he can say with Paul, 2 Tim. 1:12: 
 ' I know w 7 hom 1 have believed.' " 
 
 [15] Ap. Conf. (II, 45): "Because (faith) comforts and lifts up the 
 heart in repentance, i. e., in its distresses, renews us, and brings the 
 Holy Spirit, enabling us to obey the law of God." 
 
428 APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION. 
 
 lb. (64): " But when we say of such faith, that it is not mere idle 
 thinking, but that it delivers us from death and begets new life in our 
 hearts, and is a work of the Holy Spirit, it does not coexist with mortal 
 sin, but produces good fruits only so long as it is really present." 
 
 Form. Conc. (Sol. Dec, IV, 10): "As Luther writes in the intro- 
 duction to St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans : ' Faith is a divine work 
 in us which changes us, divinely regenerates", mortifies the old Adam, 
 makes of us altogether different men (in heart, soul, and in all our 
 powers), and confers the Holy Spirit upon us. Oh, it is a living, effica- 
 tious, energetic power that we have in faith, so that it cannot exist 
 without always producing good works ! It does not inquire whether 
 good works are to be performed, but, before any such inquiry, has al- 
 ready performed many, and is always busy in the performance of them." 
 Be. (518): " Confidence is always attended with love. For, when our 
 will has respect to Christ as a present good, and to God as appeased for 
 Christ's sake and rendered propitious to us, it renders to him a love not 
 only of complacency, but likewise of benevolence ; its impulses are good 
 will to him, a desire to perform what will be good and grateful to him." 
 
 [16] Holl. (1163): " A false or vain and dead faith is equivocally 
 Called faith, as it is only an empty persuasion and boasting of faith, or 
 a bold presumption upon the mercy and grace of God on account of the 
 merit of Christ, in an impenitent man, indulging himself in sin, con- 
 cerning which see James 2: 20. We speak of true and living faith, 
 which receives its vitality from Christ, and when it justifies the con- 
 verted sinner it exerts and displays its vital energy in love and good 
 works." Ap. Conf. (Ill, 128): "(James says) that (faith) is dead 
 which does not produce good works ; living, that which does produce 
 them. (Ill, 21 and 22.) The faith of which we speak exists in re- 
 pentance, that is, it is conceived amid the terrors of conscience, which 
 perceives the wrath of God against our sins and seeks their remission 
 and to be liberated from sin. Faith ought to increase and be confirmed 
 amid such terrors and other distresses. It can not therefore exist in 
 those who live after the flesh, who delight in carnal lusts and obey 
 them." 
 
 [17] Ap. Conf. (II, 56): " Faith does not justify or save because it 
 is a meritorious work, but only because it accepts the proffered mercy." 
 Ibid. (74); " Love, also, and good works ought to follow faith ; where- 
 fore, they are not so excluded that they should not follow it, but confi- 
 dence in the meritoriousness of love or works is excluded in justification." 
 Form. Conc. (Sol. Dec, III, 41): "That which Luther has well said 
 remains true, ' Faith and works agree well and are inseparably con- 
 
LIVING AND DEAD FAITH CONTRASTED. 429 
 
 nected, but it is faitli alone which receives the blessing without works, 
 and yet it is never alone.' " 42 : " In regard to the question how faitli 
 justifies, this is Paul's doctrine on this point, that faith alone without 
 works justifies, inasmuch as it applies and communicates to us the merit 
 of Christ. But when it is asked how and by what indication a Chris- 
 tian man can recognize and distinguish either in himself or in other 
 men a true and living faith, and likewise a feigned and dead faith, 
 since in the place of faith many torpid and secure Christians indulge in 
 a vain opinion (when they nevertheless have not true faith), the Apol. 
 thus answers : 'James calls that a dead faith which is not followed by 
 good works of every description and the fruits of the Spirit.' " The dis- 
 tinction of Holl. (1172) is very striking: " The power and energy of 
 faith are twofold, receptive, or apprehensive, and operative. The former 
 is that by which faith passively receives Christ and everything obtained 
 by his merit (John 1 : 12; 17: 8; Col. 2: 6; 1 Tim. 1: 15; Rom. 5: 17; 
 Acts 10 : 43 ; James 1:12; Gal. 3 : 14). The latter is that by which 
 faith manifests itself actively by works of love and the practice of other 
 virtues. Gal. 5 : 6. Note: 'The epithet working by love (in Gal. 5 : 
 6) is an attribute of faith which has justified, not of one which will in 
 the future justify, much less the form or essence of justifying faith so far 
 as it justifies. For the Apostle does not describe the office of justify- 
 ing faith, so far as it justifies, but another office, to wit, its operation by 
 love ; " and the passage from Brentz (Ap. Conf., Wurtemburg) : 
 1 Faith, so to speak, has two hands. One, which it extends upwards to 
 embrace Christ with all his benefits, and by this we are justified ; the 
 other, which it reaches downwards to perform the works of love and 
 of the other virtues, and by this we prove the reality of faith, but are 
 not thereby justified.' " 
 
 Quen. (IV, 281) thus combines the various statements in regard to 
 faith : " If you inquire after the origin of justifying faith, it is heaven- 
 derived ; if in regard to the means by ivhich it is proffered, it is begotten 
 by the Word of God and the Sacraments; if in regard to the effects, 
 it attains the pardon of sins ; if in regard to the consequences, they are 
 shown through the holy works of love; if in regard to the reward, it is 
 recompensed in eternal salvation ; if in regard to the relation to virtues, 
 it is the root and foundation of the rest." 
 
 [18] Holl. (1187) : " Certainty belongs to faith in Christ, (a) on 
 the part of the object believed, in which there can be no falsehood. 
 For the Word of God, which is received by the assent of faith, is most 
 true, on account of the authority of God who reveals it ; (b) on the 
 part of the subject, or of him who believes, and who most firmly ad- 
 
430 APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION. 
 
 heres to and depends upon the divine promises. For faith is the evi- 
 dence of things not seen, Heb. 11 : 1 ; a firm assent and a full confidence, 
 Rom. 4 : 21 ; Col. 2:2; Heb. 6 : 11 ; a firm persuasion, Eph. 3 : 12 ; 
 1 Cor. 6 : 17." Id. (1188): "Converted and regenerated men can and 
 do know with an infallible certainty that they truly believe, both from 
 the avfifiaprvpia, or the concurring testimony of the Holy Ghost with the 
 testimony of their own spirit, or of their soul enlightened and renewed 
 (Rom. 8: 16; 1 John 5: 9), and likewise from the examination and 
 proof of faith (2 Cor. 13 : 5)." 
 
 [19] Holl. (1186) : " Faith is weak or infirm, when either a feeble 
 light of the knowledge of Christ glimmers in the intellect, or the prom- 
 ise of grace is received with a languid and weak assent, or confidence 
 struggles with an alarmed conscience. So Mark 9 : 24. But yet a weak 
 faith may be true ; as a spark concealed under the ashes is true fire, and 
 a tender infant is a true human being. A strong or firm faith is a clear 
 knowledge of the divine mercy, offered in Christ, a solid assent, an in- 
 trepid confidence overcoming all terrors. Comp. Rom. 4: 18." Chmn. 
 (Loc. c. Th., II, 270) : "The essentials should be marked. For we are 
 justified by faith not because it is a virtue so firm, robust, and perfect, 
 but on account of the object, because faith apprehends Christ. When 
 then faith does not err in its object, but apprehends that true object, 
 although with a languid faith, or at least endeavors and desires to appre- 
 hend it, it is genuine and justifies." 
 
 § 42. (2) Justification. 
 
 The effect of faith is justification ; [1] by which is to be under- 
 stood that act of God by which he removes the sentence of con- 
 demnation, to which man is exposed in consequence of his sins, 
 releases him from his guilt, and ascribes to him the merit of 
 Christ. Br. (574) : " Justification denotes that act by which the 
 sinner, who is responsible for guilt and liable to punishment 
 [reus culpve etpoenee), but who believes in Christ, is pronounced just 
 by God the judge." [2] This act occurs at the instant* in which 
 the merit of Christ is appropriated by faith, [3] and can properly 
 be designated & forensic or judicial act, since God in it, as if in a 
 civil court, pronounces a judgment upon man, which assigns to 
 him an entirely different position, and entirely different rights. [4] 
 By justification we are, therefore, by no means to understand a 
 moral condition existing in man, or a moral change which he has 
 experienced, but only a judgment pronounced upon man, by which 
 
JUSTIFICATION. 431 
 
 his relation to God is reversed, [5] and indeed in such a manner, 
 that a man can now consider himself one whose sins are blotted 
 out, who is no longer responsible for them before God ; who, on 
 the other hand, appears before God as accepted and righteous, in 
 whom God finds nothing more to punish, at whom he has no 
 longer any occasion to be displeased. 
 
 Through this act of justification emanating from God we re- 
 ceive, 1. Bemission of sins (Bom. 4:7; Ps. 32 : 1, 2 ; Bom. 3 : 
 25; Luke 11:4; 2 Cor. 5 : 19). 
 
 2. The Imputation of the righteousness of Christ [6] 
 (Bom. 5 : 9 ; 2 Cor. 5 : 21; Gal. 3:6; Phil. 3:9; Bom. 4:5); for 
 God, from the moment in which faith is exercised, regards all 
 that Christ has accomplished, as if it had been done by man, and 
 attributes the merit of Christ to him, as if it were his own. [7] 
 From this can be seen what we are to designate as the ground of 
 our justification, and what is the means by which it is attained. 
 The ground lies alone in the merit of Christ, for by this our sins 
 are blotted out, and God is enabled to receive us again into 
 favor. [8] The means, however, through which we attain justi- 
 fication is faith. [9] In no wise, therefore, is any merit or worth- 
 iness on our part demanded as the condition for the impartation 
 of justification, as if upon that our justification should depend. It 
 is not denied, indeed, that a moral change takes place in man, 
 with the entrance of faith, and therefore also with that of justifica- 
 tion; yet this is to be regarded as only an attendant of justifica- 
 tion and contemporaneous with it, but in no wise as the condition 
 upon which we attain justification ; [10] and this the less, as it is 
 only the grace of God which displays itself in j ustification, that 
 furnishes the ground and possibility of such a change. [11] The 
 moral worthiness of man cannot be made account of in the in- 
 quiry concerning the reasons of his being received into the favor 
 of God, [12] and it is highly important to assert this firmly, as we 
 would deprive ourselves of the firm footing on which our justifi- 
 cation rests, if we regarded it as in any degree dependent upon 
 anything done by us. [13] Justification is, accordingly, to be re- 
 garded throughout as a free gift of grace on the part of God, 
 which is offered to us gratuitously and without requiring any ad- 
 dition to it on our part, and which can be received and accepted 
 
432 APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION. 
 
 only by faith, as it is expressed in the declaration that we are jus- 
 tified, gratuitously, by faith alone, [14] and for Christ's sake. [15] 
 This doctrine, according to which, in the act of j ustification, all 
 man's works are excluded and the whole is considered as effected 
 by God's grace, constitutes the central point of the knowledge 
 which we owe to the Eeformation ; [16] in it there is offered man 
 a sure and firm foundation upon which he may build his hopes 
 of salvation, and a sure way is pointed out to him of obtaining 
 it. [17] 
 
 [1] Quen. (IY, 286): " The immediate effect of faith is the remission 
 of sins, adoption, justification, union with Christ, access to God, and 
 peace of conscience. Among these effects of faith justification is the 
 principal, to which all the rest can be referred." 
 
 [2] Quen. (Ill, 526) : " Justification is the external, judicial, gra- 
 cious act of the most Koly Trinity, by which a sinful man, whose sins 
 are forgiven, on account of the merit of Christ apprehended by faith, is 
 accounted just, to the praise of God's glorious grace and justice and to 
 the salvation of the justified." 
 
 [3] Br. (574) : " For with and through faith man is at once justi- 
 fied ; so that the act by which faith is conferred upon man, and the act 
 by which man is justified, are simultaneous ; although faith is by nature 
 first in order and justification subsequent to it." 
 
 [4] Br. (574) : " Justification has a forensic sense, and denotes that 
 act by which God, the judge, pronounces righteous the sinner respon- 
 sible for guilt and liable to punishment, but who believes in Jesus." 
 
 Chmn. (Loc. c. Th., II, 250) : " Paul everywhere describes justifi- 
 cation as a judicial process, because the conscience of the sinner accused 
 by the divine law before the tribunal of God, convicted and lying under 
 the sentence of eternal condemnation, but fleeing to the throne of grace, 
 is restored, acquitted, delivered from the sentence of condemnation, is 
 received into eternal life, on account of the obedience and intercession 
 of the Son of God, the Mediator, which is apprehended and applied by 
 faith." According to this, justification signifies to pronounce righteous. 
 Form. Conc (Sol. Dec, III, 17): "The word justification signifies 
 in this matter to pronounce righteous, to absolve from sins and the 
 eternal punishment of sins on account of Christ's righteousness, which 
 is imputed to faith by God." Br. (575) : " Although the Latin word 
 justificare is compounded of the adjective Justus and the verb facere, it 
 does not denote in general usage and especially in the Scriptures, when 
 
JUSTIFICATION A FORENSIC ACT. 433 
 
 sinful man is said to be justified before God, the infusion of an habitual 
 righteousness, but according to the import of the Hebrew word p^^H 
 (2 Sam. 15 : 4 ; Deut. 25 : 1), and the word Stuatovv in the Septuagint, 
 and Paul (Rom. 3 and 4), the Latin justificare, is also transferred from 
 an outward to a spiritual court, at which men are placed as before a di- 
 vine tribunal, and are acquitted after the case has been heard and sen- 
 tence has been pronounced." According to the Catholic doctrine "jus- 
 tify" is equivalent in import to making righteous; making a righteous 
 person out of a wicked one. In opposition to this, Ap. Coxf» (III, 131): 
 "Justification signifies not to make a wicked person righteous, but in a 
 forensic sense to pronounce righteous." Quen. (Ill, 515): "These 
 words ditcaiovv and p**li*n, nowhere and never in the whole Scriptures, 
 even when not used in reference to the justification of the sinner before 
 God, signify justification by the infusion of new qualities, but whenever 
 they are used of God justifying the wicked before his tribunal they have 
 a forensic signification." Grh. (VII, 4 seq,) gives in what follows the 
 Scripture proof in detail : " The forensic signification (of the word 
 dtKatovv) is proved, (1) because it denotes a judicial act, not only without 
 reference to the doctrine of gratuitous justification before God (Is. 5 : 23 ; 
 Deut. 25 : 1 ; 2 Sam. 15:4; Ps. 82 : 3 ; Is. 43 : 9), but also in the very 
 article of justification (Ps. 143 : 2 ; Job 9 : 2,3; Luke 18 : 14) ; (2) 
 because it is opposed to condemnation (Deut. 25: 1; 1 Kings 8: 32; 
 Prov. 17: 15; Matt. 12: 37; Rom. 5: 16; 8: 33, 34); (3) because its 
 correlatives are judicial. For a judgment is mentioned, Ps. 143: 2 ; a 
 judge, John 5 : 27 ; a tribunal, Rom. 14 : 10; a criminal, Rom. 3 : 19; 
 a plaintiff, John 5 : 45 ; a witness, Rom. 2 : 15 ; an indictment, Col. 2 : 
 14; an obligation, Matt. 18 : 24; an advocate, 1 John 2 : 1 ; an acquit- 
 tal, Ps. 32 : 1. The law accuses the sinner before the judgment-seat of 
 God, that he may be subject to the judgment of God. Rom. 3:19. 
 Conscience concurs with this accusation of the law, Rom. 2:15. Since, 
 in consequence of sin, the whole nature of man and all his works are mis- 
 erably contaminated, he discovers nothing to oppose to the judgment of 
 God ; the law therefore hurls the thunder of its curse and condemnation 
 upon man convicted of sin, but the Gospel presents Christ the Mediator, 
 who by his most perfect obedience has atoned for our sins ; to him the 
 sinner, terrified and condemned by the law, flees by true faith, opposes 
 this righteousness of Christ to the sentence of God and the condemna- 
 tion of the law, and in view of, and by the imputation of this, he is jus- 
 tified, that is, freed from the sentence of condemnation and pronounced 
 righteous ; (4) because the equivalent phrases are judicial. To be justi- 
 fied is to be not called into judgment, Ps. 143: 2 ; to be not condemned, 
 
434 APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION. 
 
 John 3 : 18; not to come into condemnation, John 5 : 24; not to be 
 judged, John 3: 18. The publican went down to his house justified, 
 that is, acquitted of his sins, Luke 18 : 14. Paul explains justification 
 by 'imputing for righteousness,' Rom. 4: 3, 5; by 'covering iniquities,' 
 by 'not imputing sin,' 5:7; by 'remitting sins,' Rom. 3: 25 ; by 'for- 
 giving trespasses,' Col. 2:13. Here belong the phrases ' to be reconciled 
 to God,' Rom. 5: 10; ' to be made righteous,' 5: 19; 'to partake of the 
 blessing,' Eph. 1:3; 'to receive remission of sins,' Acts 10: 43; 'to be 
 saved,' Acts 4: 12. Comp. the parable, Matt. 18 : 27." 
 
 [5] Br. (577): "Justification does not mean a real and internal 
 change of man." Holl. (928): "Justification is a judicial, and that, 
 too, a gracious act, by which God, reconciled by the satisfaction of 
 Christ, acquits the sinner who believes in Christ of the offenses with 
 which he is charged, and accounts and pronounces him righteous. Since 
 this action takes place apart from man, in God, it cannot intrinsically 
 change man. For, as a debtor for whom another pays his debt, so that 
 he is considered released from the debt, undergoes not an intrinsic but 
 an extrinsic change in regard to his condition, so the sinner who is re- 
 puted and pronounced free from his sins, on account of the satisfaction 
 of Christ applied by true faith, is changed, not intrinsically, but extrin- 
 sically, with respect to his better condition. The point from which this 
 external change takes places (terminus a quo) is the state of being respon- 
 sible for guilt and liable to punishment ; because thereby the sinner re- 
 mains in a state of sin and wrath (Rom. 4:7; Eph. 1 : 7 ; 2 Cor. 5:19). 
 The point to which it conducts {terminus ad quern) is the state of grace 
 and righteousness ; because God, remitting the offenses of the sinner 
 who believes in Christ, receives him into favor, and imputes to him the 
 righteousness of Christ (Rom. 4 : 5, 6 ; Gal. 3 : 6 ; 2 Cor. 5 : 21 : Phjl. 
 3:9; Rom. 5 : 19)." To the last, Br. (579) remarks in addition : 
 " Some refer to this place the privileges of the sons of God, and the in- 
 heritance of eternal life, which is conferred or adjudged to us in God's 
 account. Some add the dignity of the reward of righteousness which 
 we obtain in this act of justification. But others, and probably the ma- 
 jority, distinguish the act by which the sonship, or the inheritance, or 
 the privilege of reward is conferred on the faithful, from justification, 
 and consider them as its consequences. . . . The Scriptures also fre- 
 quently distinguish between these two things, viz., freedom from the con- 
 demnation of sin, with power to become the sons of God, and the heav- 
 enly inheritance, of which the latter implies the former, and is furnished 
 to the justified by a subsequent and new gift, viz,, that when the judg- 
 ment is finished, that sonship or adoption will take place referred to in 
 Rom. 8 : 15, 23 ; Gal. 4:5; Eph. 1 : 5." 
 
IMPUTATION OF CIIRIST'S RIGHTEOUSNESS. 435 
 
 [6] Quen. (Ill, 524) : " Our justification before God consists in the 
 remission and non-imputation of sins and the imputation of the righteous- 
 ness of Christ." The Form. Conc. sometimes presents both these ex- 
 pressions conjointly, and sometimes it describes the sentence of justifica- 
 tion as having reference only to the remission of sins. It says (Epit., 
 Ill, 4): "We believe that our righteousness before God consists in this, 
 that the Lord forgives us our sins through mere grace. . . . For he 
 gives and imputes to us the righteousness. of the obedience of Christ; on 
 account of this righteousness we are received into favor by God, and are 
 accounted just." And it says (Sol. Dec, III, 9) : " Concerning the 
 righteousness of faith, we confess that the sinner is justified before God, 
 i. e., is absolved from all his sins and from the sentence of most righteous 
 condemnation, and adopted into the number of the children of God and 
 regarded as a heir of eternal life." . . . The same course is adopted by 
 other Dogmaticians. No difference is thereby intended in the matter 
 itself. Br. mentions, as the form of justification, only the forgiveness of 
 sins, because he presupposes the imputation of the righteousness of 
 Christ as that upon wltich the forgiveness is based. He says (588) : 
 " It is certain, when we call the form of justification the forgiveness 
 or non-imputation of sins, the imputation of the righteousness of 
 Christ is not excluded, . . . nor the imputation of this faith itself for 
 righteousness. That is, we mean to say, that the imputation of the 
 righteousness of Christ, and of faith itself, is only logically prior to that 
 forensic act of justification by which men are absolved from the guilt 
 of sins ; for to the question, Why does God justify man ? the a priori 
 explanation is given, Because God imputes to man the righteousness or 
 merit of Christ apprehended by faith, or so judges it to belong to man 
 that he is on this account absolved from the guilt of his sins." Other 
 Dogmaticians express themselves differently in regard to the relation 
 existing between the forgiveness of sins and the imputation of the right- 
 eousness of Christ. 
 
 Quen. (ib.): " These parts (so to speak) are not different or distinct 
 essentially (™ hvai)^ but merely logically (j& Ad/^); for the imputation 
 of Christ's righteousness is essentially nothing else than the remission of 
 sins, and the remission of sins is nothing else than the imputation of 
 Christ's righteousness, so that either word separately taken expresses 
 the whole nature of justification. Whence the apostle Paul, Rom. 4, 
 interchanges the forgiveness of sins and the imputation of righteousness 
 in his description of justification, which he sometimes defines as the for- 
 giveness of sins, and sometimes as the imputation of righteousness. For, 
 as it can properly be said that at one and the same time, and by one and 
 
436 APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION. 
 
 the same action, the expulsion of darkness from the atmosphere is the 
 introduction of light, so one and the same wicked man, at one and the 
 same time, and by the very same act of justification, is both freed from 
 guilt and pronounced righteous." Holl. (915): " Remission of sins 
 and the imputation of Christ's righteousness are inseparable and closely 
 united acts ; but distinct, indeed, in form, as the first is privative, and 
 the other positive, the one results immediately from the passive obedi- 
 ence of Christ, the other from his active obedience. We do not deny, 
 meanwhile, that the one may properly be inferred from the other, for 
 there is no sinner, whose sins are pardoned, but has the righteousness 
 of Christ imputed, and the reverse." 
 
 In earlier times, indeed, the definition of renovation or regeneration 
 was also included in that of justification. Thus Mel. says (Loc. Com. 
 Th., II, 207, seq.): "The first (degree) of evangelical liberty is that 
 the forgiveness of sins, reconciliation, justification, or the imputation of 
 righteousness and acceptance to eternal life, and the inheritance of eter- 
 nal life, are bestowed upon us freely on account of the Son of God. . . . 
 The second degree is the gift of the Holy Spirit, who enkindles new 
 light in the mind and new emotions in the will and heart, governs us, 
 and begins in us eternal life." And the Ap. Conf., II, 72 : "Because to 
 be justified signifies that the wicked are made righteous through regen- 
 eration, it signifies also that they are pronounced or reputed as righteous. 
 For the Scripture uses both these methods of speaking." lb., Ill, 40 : 
 "Although it is generally admitted that justification signifies not only 
 the beginning of renovation, but the reconciliation by which we are af- 
 terwards accepted." When, afterwards, these phrases were taken sepa- 
 rately, and in the definition of justification only the forgiveness of sin 
 and the imputation of Christ's righteousness were included, no change 
 of doctrine was thereby introduced. Mel. and the Ap. meant thereby 
 only to say that as faith, by which one apprehends the merit of Christ, 
 is wrought by the Holy Spirit, regeneration in its beginnings is at the 
 same time implied in it. Ap. II, 45 : ''This special faith, by which 
 any one believes that his sins are forgiven for Christ's sake, and that 
 God is reconciled and rendered propitious for Christ's sake, attains the 
 forgiveness of sins and justifies us. And because in penitence, i. e., in 
 our spiritual distress, he comforts us and encourages our hearts, regen- 
 erates us and bestows the Holy Spirit, so that then we can obey the 
 divine law." To this statement the later theologians also adhered. 
 See Note 10. They were influenced, however, by the controversies 
 that afterwards arose with the Roman Catholics, and also with some 
 Lutheran theologians (A. Osiander), already in the definition of justifi- 
 
437 
 
 cation, to guard against the appearance of admitting that the renovation 
 thus introduced in its beginnings along with the forgiveness of sins, was 
 in any sense a condition of the bestowal of the forgiveness of sins. And 
 with this the Apol. entirely accords. 
 
 [7] Quex. (Ill, 525) : " The form of imputation consists in the gra- 
 cious reckoning of God, by which the penitent sinner, on account of the 
 most perfect obedience of another, i. e., of Christ, apprehended by faith, 
 according to Gospel mercy, is pronounced righteous before the divine 
 tribunal, '•just as if this obedience had been rendered by the man him- 
 self.'" Ap. Conf. (Ill, 184) : "To be justified here signifies, accord- 
 ing to forensic usage, to absolve a guilty man and pronounce him just, 
 but on account of the righteousness of another, viz., of Christ, which 
 righteousness of another is communicated to us by faith. . . . Because 
 the righteousness of Christ is given to us through faith, so faith is 
 righteousness in us imputatively, i. e., it is that by which we are caused 
 to be accepted of God in consequence of the imputation and ordination 
 of God." The expression : the righteousness of Christ, is explained as 
 follows in the Form. Conc. (Sol. Dec, III, 14): "The righteousness 
 (of Christ), which is imputed before God out of pure grace to faith, or 
 to believers, is the obedience, passion, and resurrection of Christ, by 
 which he satisfied the law for our sake and atoned for our sins." 
 Synonymous with the expression: "the righteousness of Christ is im- 
 puted to us," is that other : " the merit or obedience of Christ is imputed 
 to us." And also this one : '•faith is imputed to us for righteousness," 
 Rom. 4: 5, which is thus explained: "only in so far as it apprehends 
 and applies to itself the righteousness of Christ." The righteousness of 
 faith, then, " is nothing else than the forgiveness of sins, the gratuitous 
 acceptance of the sinner solely on account of the obedience and most- 
 perfect merit of Christ alone." (lb. 54.) 
 
 Chmx. (Loc. Th., 274) vindicates the doctrine of imputation, against 
 the Papists, as follows : " There is an imputation which is based upon 
 and has reference to a foundation in the person working, to whom the 
 imputation is made, and this is done not as a matter of grace, but as a 
 matter of debt. But there is another imputation, which neither has nor 
 refers to a foundation, in view of or by reason of which the imputation 
 is made, but is based upon the grace and mercy of God, who justifies 
 the wicked. And in this, that he says by this imputation the wicked 
 man is justified, he shows that the foundation is altogether different in the 
 believer to whom this imputation is gratuitous ; to whom, namely, not 
 righteousness but guilt would be imputed, if God wished to enter into 
 judgment. Paul, therefore, distinctly and clearly shows that he wishes 
 
438 APPLICATION OP REDEMPTION. 
 
 this word, imputation, in the doctrine of justification, to be understood 
 not in the former, but in the latter sense. And the same thing he also 
 shows more fully and proves from David, who describes the blessedness 
 of the man to whom God imputes righteousness without works. There- 
 fore the foundation of this imputation, concerning which Paul speaks, is 
 not in him to whom the imputation is made, for he says, 'without 
 works.' And in Eph. 2 : 8 he more expressly says : ' not of your- 
 selves.' But he adds that sins in this imputation are forgiven, that ini- 
 quities are covered, that crimes are not imputed. There is, therefore, in 
 those who believe, to whom this gratuitous imputation is made, an alto- 
 gether different foundation, if God should wish to enter into judgment 
 with them. The imputation of righteousness consists, therefore, in the 
 grace and mercy of God, which, for the sake of Christ, cover up the 
 inherent foundation, viz., sin, so that it may not be imputed, and im- 
 pute to the believer, through grace, the foundation which is not in him, 
 just as if the righteousness were inherent in that perfection which he 
 owes. These three things, therefore, we now infer from the true prem- 
 ises which belong to the word imputation in this article : 1. There is no 
 basis in believers, in view, and by reason of which, righteousness is im- 
 puted for happiness, not even in Abraham, although adorned by the 
 Holy Spirit with distinguished gifts of renewal. 2. A very different 
 basis is discovered, if God wish to enter into judgment, viz., sin, which 
 is to be covered up, so as not to be imputed. 3. But that imputation is 
 a referring act (relatio) of the divine mind and will, which, through 
 gratuitous mercy for Christ's sake, does not impute their sins to believ- 
 ers, but imputes to them righteousness, i. e., they are regarded before 
 God, in his judgment, as if they possessed perfect inherent righteousness, 
 and thus salvation and eternal life are bestowed upon them as if they 
 were righteous. But what the fourth point is, that also belongs to im- 
 putation, and wherefore it is added can be understood from what follows. 
 When a judge, by his own referring act (relatio), imputes the sentence 
 of righteousness to a guilty person without any foundation, this is an 
 abomination (Prov. 17:15; Ex. 23:1; Deut. 25:1; Is. 5 : 23 ; 1 
 Chron. 8 : 32). Some may reply, God is a perfectly free agent, and as 
 such can justify whom he will andas he will. But God has revealed his 
 will in the law, and this cannot be broken. . . . Therefore, in accord- 
 ance with that revealed will, God does not wish to justify any one with- 
 out righteousness, i. e., unless according to the law satisfaction has been 
 made for sin, and the law has been fulfilled by a perfect obedience. And 
 Paul says, when faith is imputed for righteousness, the law is not made 
 void, but established, i. e., to use the scholastic terminology, the act of 
 
THE ONLY GROUND OF JUSTIFICATION. 439 
 
 the divine mind imputes to the believer the sentence of righteousness for 
 eternal life, not without a basis. But that basis is not in believers. But 
 God has offered to us his Son as Mediator, made under the law, to 
 which he rendered satisfaction both by bearing our sins and by perfect 
 obedience. . . . Thus we will obtain a perfect referring act whose 
 foundation is in obedience and redemption, in Christ Jesus our Lord. 
 The referring act (relatio) is the grace and mercy of God ; the object of 
 it is the believer, to whom, on Christ's account, sins are not imputed, 
 but who is through Christ accounted righteous before God unto eternal 
 life, the righteousness of Christ being imputed to him." . . . 
 
 "This exposition explains the whole doctrine and refutes many cavils. 
 . . . The Jesuits say, a referring act (relatio) without a foundation is 
 an empty phantasm and an illusion, as if Crassus, burdened with debt, 
 were saluted as rich. Such, they say, is imputative, righteousness, 
 which has no foundation inherent in ourselves. But these cavils are 
 abundantly refuted by what we have already said. For we do not teach 
 that God, through any levity, imputes righteousness to believers with- 
 out any foundation ; but we affirm, from the Word of God, that there 
 needs to be ever so firm a foundation of gratuitous imputation, that the 
 righteousness inherent even in Abraham and David could not be the 
 foundation of that referring act {relatio) and imputation, but there was 
 need that the Son of God should become incarnate. . . .The right- 
 eousness of faith is, therefore, not of the least but of the greatest real- 
 ity, for Christ is our righteousness ; nor is it an empty phantasm, for it 
 is the result of the divine thought and judgment." In regard to the 
 meaning of the word justification, Holl. further remarks (914): "Im- 
 putation, in the doctrine of justification, is not taken in a physical sense, 
 so as to signify to insert, to implant, but in a moral, judicial, and decla- 
 rative sense, so as to signify to adjudicate, to attribute, to ascribe, to 
 transfer, confer, devolve upon another the effect of a voluntary act by 
 one's own estimate and decision." 
 
 The reality of imputation Br. shows as follows (581): " It is called 
 imputation, not as an empty or imaginary transfer of the merit of one to 
 another, destitute alike of a basis and fruit ; but because it is an act of 
 the intellect and will of him who exercises the judgment, by which he 
 adjudges that the merit of one, which is offered for another, and is ap- 
 prehended by the faith of him for whose benefit it has been offered, can 
 be legitimately accepted as if it were his own merit, and is willing to re- 
 ceive it in such manner as if he had of himself offered it, whatever it is. 
 Paul himself uses this argument in Rom. 4: 3-6." Quen. (Ill, 525): 
 "This imputation is most real, whether respect is had to the righteousness 
 
440 APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION. 
 
 which is imputed, or to the act of imputation. The righteousness of 
 Christ, or his obedience, active and passive, which is imputed to us, is 
 most true and real, for it corresponds entirely to the mind and will of God 
 expressed in the law. The act of imputation, also, or the imputation 
 itself, is real, because its measure is the infallible intellect of God. 
 Whence God cannot repute or consider him just to whom true right- 
 eousness has not been appropriated ; nor can there proceed from the 
 divine will, the rule of all excellence, approbation of an imaginary or 
 fictitious estimation or righteousness. They, therefore, to whom the 
 righteousness of Christ is imputed, are truly righteous, though not inhe- 
 rently, or by inherence, but imputatively, and by an extrinsic designation 
 at least they are such, for even from that which is external a true desig- 
 nation may be derived. It is, therefore, an idle question, whether, on 
 account of that imputation, we are really righteous, or are merely con- 
 sidered righteous. For the judgment of God is according to truth. 
 Wherefore, he is truly just who, in the judgment of God, is regarded as 
 just." 
 
 [8] The Dogmaticians distinguish (Quen., Ill, 517): "The impul- 
 sive internal cause of our justification, which is the purely gratuitous 
 grace of God (Rom. 3: 24; 11: 6; Eph. 2: 8, 9; 2 Tim. 1:9; Tit. 3: 
 4-6)," and the " impulsive, external, and meritorious cause, which is 
 Christ the Mediator, by virtue of his active and passive obedience (Rom. 
 3: 24; 2 Cor. 5: 21)," (Br., 583). "The impulsive external cause 
 does not annul the gratuitous favor of God, in the matter of justifica- 
 tion, nor is it excluded from it ; since, rather, the fact is due to divine 
 grace, that God sent his Son to make satisfaction for us, so that we 
 could be justified, and that he accepts this merit belonging to another as 
 if it were our own." Whence it appears in what sense it is said that 
 the ground of justification is exterior to man. Mel. (Loc. c. Th., I, 
 179) : "If they duly consider these (alarms, that accompany true peni- 
 tence), thfty would know that thoroughly terrified minds seek consola- 
 tion outside of themselves, and this consolation is the confidence with 
 which the will acquiesces in the promise of mercy, granted for the sake 
 of the Mediator." Quen. (Ill, 525) : " This imputation has a most 
 firm foundation, not in man, who is justified, but without him, namely, 
 in God himself, who imputes, and in Christ the Mediator, who earned 
 the imputation by rendering satisfaction." The contrary doctrine is 
 that of the Roman Catholic Church, which, by justification, under- 
 stands, " to make a righteous out of an unrighteous person." According 
 to this doctrine the ground of our salvation does not lie in the appro- 
 priation of the merit of Christ, but in our moral transformation. It is 
 
JUSTIFICATION BY FAITH. 
 
 441 
 
 then said: " That, on account of which man is justified and constituted 
 an heir of eternal life, is an infused habit of righteousness and love, or 
 newness of life, or righteousness inherent in us, by which we observe 
 the law." (Quex., Ill, 540.) When the Romanists use the phrase, 
 "the righteousness of Christ," they employ it in a sense entirely differ- 
 ent from that in which it is employed in the Lutheran Church ; for, 
 while in. the latter the righteousness of Christ is understood to mean 
 that righteousness which Christ, by obedience towards the Father, has 
 secured for us, the Romanists understand by the phrase the moral per- 
 fection of Christ himself, the righteousness inherent in him. This, 
 however, is carefully distinguished, by the Lutheran Dogmaticians, as 
 the essential, from the other, the habitual and meritorious righteousness. 
 Even the Lutheran divine, Andrew Osiaxder, understood by the 
 righteousness of Christ his essential righteousness, and thus confounded 
 justification and sanctification, like the Romanists. He says in his 
 Coxf. et Disp., A. D. 1549: "That the fulfilment of the law, effected 
 by Christ, and obedience and remission of sins, prepare for righteous- 
 ness, but the righteousness by which we are accounted righteous before 
 God, is the divine nature of Christ entering into us by faith, and abid- 
 ing in us, or the essential and eternal righteousness of God, which, 
 dwelling in us, enables us to act righteously." Hence the decision of 
 the Form. Coxc. (Sol. Dec, III, 55) : " As in our churches it is con- 
 sidered beyond controversy by the divines of the Augsburg Confession, 
 that all our righteousness is to be sought outside of ourselves and apart 
 from the merits and works, virtues and dignity of men, and that it ex- 
 ists alone in our Lord Jesus Christ, it is carefully to be considered in 
 what way, in the matter of justification, Christ is said to be our right- 
 eousness. For our righteousness does not consist in his divine nature 
 (Osiander), nor in his human nature (Stancarus), but in his entire per- 
 son, for he, as Go'd and man, in his entire and most perfect obedience, 
 is our righteousness." 
 
 [9] Holl. (903) : "The receptive means, or that on the part of the 
 sinner which receives Christ's merit, and the grace of God founded upon 
 it, is faith." Faith is thus, indeed, considered a cause, but an impul- 
 sive cause subordinate, or an instrumental cause, organic, and receptive ; 
 only in the sense, however, that by faith the merit of Christ, justifying 
 grace, etc., must be received, and by no means in the other, that in faith 
 there is an effective cause of justification. This is contained already in 
 the general statement of the Apol. (II, 53, German) : " Wherefore, 
 whenever we speak of the faith that justifies, or of justifying faith, these 
 three things always concur. First, the divine promise; second, that 
 29 
 
44'2 APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION. 
 
 this offers grace gratuitously, without merit; third, that the blood and merit 
 of Christ constitute the treasure through which sin is paid for. The 
 promise is received through faith ; the fact, moreover, that it offers grace 
 without merit utterly excludes all our worthiness and merit, and exalts 
 the great grace and mercy ; and the merit of Christ is the treasure, for 
 that must indeed be a treasure and noble security through which the 
 sins of all the world are paid for." More specifically, Form. Conc. 
 (Sol. Dec, III, 13) : "Faith does not justify because it is so good a 
 work, so illustrious a virtue, but because it apprehends and embraces 
 the merit of Christ in the promise of the Gospel." Holl. (903) : 
 " Faith justifies not by itself, by its own dignity, or value, by moving 
 God to justify the believer, but because, as an instrument or receptive 
 means, it lays hold of the merit of Christ, in view of which and with- 
 out the least detriment to his justice, God, of his mere grace, is moved 
 to pardon and consider righteous the penitent sinner believing in Christ. 
 For the energy or internal power of justifying faith is the receiving of 
 Christ, of the grace of God based upon Christ, pardoning sin, offered 
 in the Gospel promise, together with the remission of sins dependent 
 on this, John 1 : 12 ; Rom. 5 : 17 ; Gal. 3: 14; Acts 10: 43. Faith 
 receives the effects of Christ's satisfaction, the remission of sins. From 
 these sacred oracles we gather that faith is the receptive means by which 
 the satisfaction of Christ, and the grace of God obtained by it, are re- 
 ceived." Quen. (Ill, 518) distinguishes, therefore, "between the caus- 
 ality of faith, which consists in apprehending and receiving, which is noth- 
 ing else than an organic and instrumental one, and the ground of that 
 causality, or justifying power, which pertains to faith not in itself and in 
 its own nature, or in so far as it is an act of apprehension. It might 
 appropriate its own merits, or imaginary merits, or human righteous- 
 ness, and yet it would not in this way justify. It does not pertain to it 
 from the generous estimation of God or his discharge of debt, as if God 
 considered faith of so much value as to impart to it the dignity and 
 power of justifying, but solely on account of the justifying object appre- 
 hended, or on account of the object, viz., so far as it apprehends the 
 merit of Christ. Paul expressly mentions this, Rom. 3 : 25, to wit, 
 that the entire justifying power of faith depends on the object appre- 
 hended. As, for example, when the hand of a hungry person takes the 
 offered bread, that taking, as such, does not satisfy the man, for he 
 might receive clay, or a stone, or other things, which could not satisfy 
 him; but the entire satisfaction depends on the object apprehended and 
 eaten, namely, the bread. So the man hungering for righteousness, 
 Matt. 5: 6, apprehends indeed by faith, or with the beggar's hand, the 
 
GOOD WORKS SUBSEQUENT TO JUSTIFICATION. 443 
 
 bread that comes from heaven. John 6: 50, 51 ; but the apprehending, 
 as such, does not drive away spiritual hunger ; but the entire effect of 
 the apprehension depends upon the object apprehended by faith, that is. 
 the redemption and the blood of Jesus Christ." 
 
 [10] Form. Coxc. (Sol. Dec, III, 32): "It is properly said that 
 believers, who are justified by faith in Christ, in this life at first obtain 
 indeed an imputed righteousness of faith, but then also they have an 
 incipient righteousness of new obedience or of good works. But these 
 two things are not to be confounded or intermingled in the doctrine of 
 justification by faith in the sight of God." Chmn. (Ex. c. Trid., I, 
 233) : " It is certain that the blessing bestowed through the Son of God 
 is twofold, namely, forgiveness of sins and renovation in which the Holy 
 Spirit enkindles new virtues in believers. For Christ by his passion 
 merited for us not only the remission of sins, but, in addition, this also, 
 that, on account of his merit, the Holy Spirit is given to us that we may 
 be renewed in the spirit of our mind. These benefits of the Son of God 
 we say are so united, that ivhen we are reconciled, at the same time the 
 spirit of renovation is also given vs. But we do not on this account 
 confound them, but distinguish them, so as to give to each its place, 
 order, and character, as we have learned from the Scriptures, that re- 
 conciliation or remission of sins goes before, and that the beginning of 
 love or of new obedience follows. But especially that faith concludes 
 that it has a reconciled God and the forgiveness of sins, not on account 
 of the subsequent and commenced renovation, but on account of the 
 Son of God the Mediator." 
 
 [11] Form. Coxc. (Sol. Dec, III, 27): "It is necessary that a per- 
 son should be righteous before he can perform good works." Ap. Coxf. 
 (11,36): "It is very foolishly asserted by adversaries, that men, de- 
 serving of eternal wrath, merit the pardon of sin by an act of love which 
 they put forth, since it is. impossible to love God unless beforehand the 
 pardon of sins has been apprehended by faith. For the heart truly per- 
 ceiving God to be angry, cannot love him unless he is shown to be ap- 
 peased ; human nature cannot raise itself to the love of an angry, con- 
 demning and punishing God, while he terrifies and seems to cast us into 
 eternal death. It is easy for the indolent to fancy these dreams of love, 
 that one guilty of mortal sin can love God above all things, because they 
 do not perceive what the anger or judgment of God is ; but, in the agony 
 and stings of conscience, the conscience itself perceives the vanity of 
 these philosophical speculations." 
 
 [12] Chmn. (Ex. c Trid., I, 234): " This is the principal question, 
 this the point, this the matter to be decided ; what that is, on account 
 
444 APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION. 
 
 of which God receives the sinner into favor ; what can and ought to be 
 opposed to the judgment of God, that we may not be condemned accor- 
 ding to the rigid sentence of the law ; what faith ought to seize and pre- 
 sent, on what to depend, when it desires to treat with God that it may- 
 be pardoned ; what should intervene for which God may become ap- 
 peased and propitious to the sinner who has merited wrath and eternal 
 damnation ; what conscience should determine that to be, on account of 
 which adoption is granted us, which affords a sure ground of confidence 
 that we shall be received to eternal life; whether it be the satisfaction, 
 obedience, and merit of the Son of God, the Mediator, or the renovation 
 commenced in us, love, and the other virtues." 
 
 [13] Mel. (I, 192): " As it is of much importance that this exclu- 
 sive particle (gratis) should be properly understood, I will explain the 
 four reasons on account of which it is necessary to retain and defend it : 
 (1) That due honor be ascribed to Christ ; (2) that conscience may re- 
 tain a sure and firm consolation (if this exclusive particle be ignored, 
 doubt is strengthened, to wit, if you suppose that there is no pardon 
 unless you have a contrition or a love sufficiently worthy, doubt will 
 adhere, which produces atone time contempt of God, at another hatred 
 and despair) ; (3) that true prayer may be offered ; (4) that the differ- 
 ence between the Law and the Gospel may be seen." 
 
 [14] Form. Conc. (Sol. Dec, III, 36): " Paul means this when he 
 urges with so much diligence and zeal in the matter of justification by 
 faith, the exclusive particles by which works are excluded from it, such 
 as these, ' without works,' ' without the law,' ' without merit,' ' by grace 
 alone,' 'gratis,' 'not of works.' But all these exclusives are embraced 
 in these w r ords, when we teach, ' we are justified before God, and saved, 
 by faith alone.'' For in this way our works are excluded, not indeed in 
 the sense that true faith can exist without contrition, or as if good works 
 did not necessarily follow true faith (as its most certain fruits) ; or, as if 
 believers in Christ ought not to perform them ; but works are excluded 
 from the doctrine of justification before God, lest they may be introduced 
 and mixed in the matter of the justification of the sinner before God, as 
 if necessary and absolutely pertaining to it. This is the true meaning of 
 the exclusive particles in the doctrine of justification, w 7 hich must be 
 firmly and sedulously retained and urged in its discussion." Chmn. 
 (Loc. Th., II, 283): " Should the inquiry be made why we contend so 
 strenuously for the particle 'alone,' and are not rather contented with 
 those exclusive particles which are contained in the Scriptures (the terms 
 'by grace, freely, without .works, imputation'), the reasons are weighty 
 and true. For as the Church, in all its periods, has used freely some 
 
THE EXCLUSIVE PARTICLES. 445 
 
 modes of speaking that things might be most plainly propounded, ex- 
 plained, defended, and retained against the various artifices of enemies ; 
 so, in the article of justification, we give a prominent place to the exclu- 
 sive particles of Paul. If it be asked for what purpose and on what 
 account we have adopted and desire to retain the particle ' alone' we an- 
 swer, the reasons are true and weighty. This particle ' alone' embraces 
 at once, and that very significantly, all the exclusive 'particles which the 
 Scriptures use." 
 
 In order to specify very particularly the sense in which the phrase 
 u we are justified by fdith alone" is used, and to guard against misunder- 
 standings, the Dogmaticians append a number of explanations, from 
 which we select the following. Quen. (Ill, 552 seq.) : "(1) We do 
 not here speak of the energy (hepyela) of faith, or of the operation of 
 justifying faith, which manifests itself in various acts of virtues, as love, 
 hope, etc.; but of the operation which is peculiar to it, native and singu- 
 lar, and is entirely incommunicable to all other moral excellencies, 
 namely, the apprehension and application of the merit of Christ. (2) 
 The exclusive particle ' alone' does not exclude different kinds of causes, 
 but subordinates them. For it is not opposed (a) to the grace of God, 
 the principal efficient cause of justification; (b) not to the merit of 
 Christ ; (c) nor to the Word and Sacraments, which are the instru- 
 mental causes of our justification, on the part of God offering and grant- 
 ing, but to our works, for it is they that are excluded by this proposition, 
 so that the proposition, faith alone justifies, is equivalent to this, faith 
 without works justifies. (3) Distinguish between the exclusion of works 
 with respect to their actual presence, and with respect to the communi- 
 cation of efficiency. Works are excluded not from being present, but 
 from the communication of efficiency ; not that they are not present to 
 faith and the justified, but that they have no energy or causation in con- 
 nection with faith in the justification of man. (4) Distinguish between 
 faith considered in respect to justification itself, and then it is only the 
 instrument apprehending the merit of Christ, and it alone justifies ; and 
 considered in the person justified, or after justification, and thus it is 
 never alone, but always attended with other graces ; indeed, it is the 
 root and beginning of them all. (5) Distinguish between faith alone 
 and a solitary faith. Faith alone justifies ; that is, it is the only organ 
 by which we lay hold of the righteousness of Christ and apply it to our- 
 selves, but it never exists alone, or is solitary ; that is, detached and 
 separated from the other virtues, because true faith is always living, not 
 dead ; therefore it has good works present with itself as its proper effect." 
 
 [15] The most correct and common expression is, " we are justified 
 
446 APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION. 
 
 by faith; that is, through faith." Synonymous in import are the ex- 
 pressions, "we are justified by grace, by the merit, by the obedience of 
 Christ." (Comp. Form. Conc, Sol. Dec, III, 9 and 12.) If the ex- 
 pression be used, "faith alone justifies," to avoid all misunderstanding, 
 this is explained as follows. Musjeus (in Holl.): " When it is said 
 concerning faith, in the nominative case, that it justifies, the language 
 seems to be figurative. The meaning is not that faith absolves a man 
 from sins and accounts him righteous ; but faith is said to justify, be- 
 cause God, in view of it, regards us righteous, or because faith (not by 
 its own, but by the worth of Christ's merit) moves God to justify us." 
 Holl. (ib.). " Osiander justly remarks : 'If we wish to speak accu- 
 rately and according to Scripture, it must be said that God alone justi- 
 fies (for it is an act of God alone) ; but by faith man is justified.' For 
 faith of itself does not justify, because it is merely apprehensive. The 
 mode of speaking, because it has become so common to say, faith alone 
 justifies, can be retained, if the phrase be properly explained in accord- 
 ance with Scripture usage." 
 
 [16] Form. Conc. (Sol. Dec, III, 6): " This article in regard to the 
 righteousness of faith is the chief one in the entire Christian doctrine, 
 without which distressed consciences can have no true and firm consola- 
 tion, or rightly appreciate the riches of Christ's grace. This is also con- 
 firmed by the testimony of Luther, when he says, if this one article 
 remains uncorrupted the Christian Church will remain uncorrupted, in 
 harmony and without party divisions ; but if it is corrupted, it is impos- 
 sible successfully to oppose a single error or a fanatical spirit." 
 
 Chmn. (Loc Th., II, 216): "This one point mainly distinguishes 
 the Church from all nations and superstitions, as Augustine says : ' The 
 Church distinguishes the just from the unjust, not by the law of works 
 but by the law of faith.' Yea, this article is, as it were, the citadel and 
 chief bulwark of the entire Christian doctrine and religion, which being 
 either obscured, or adulterated, or subverted, it is impossible to retain 
 the purity of the doctrine in other points. But, this doctrine remaining 
 untouched, all idolatries, superstitions, and perversions in all the other 
 doctrines destroy themselves." 
 
 [17] The later theologians add further: " The effects and properties 
 of justification." As effects, Quen. (Ill, 526) enumerates: "(l)our 
 mystical union with God, John 15: 4-6, 14, 23; Gal. 2 : 19, 20 ; 3: 27; 
 Eph. 3 : 17 ; (2) adoption as sons of God, John 1:12; Rom. 8:14; 
 (3) peace of conscience, Rom. 5: 1; (4) certain hearing of prayer, 
 Rom. 8 : 32 ; James 1 : 5-7 ; (5) sanctification, Rom. 6:12; (6) eter- 
 nal salvation, Rom. 4: 7, 8." As properties : "(1) Immediate efficacy, 
 
EFFECTS OF JUSTIFICATION. 447 
 
 for it is not gradual and successive, as renovation, but in a moment, an 
 instant, simultaneously and at once. (2) Perfection, because all sins are 
 perfectly pardoned, so that there is need of no satisfaction of our own, 
 1 John 1:7; Rom. 8:1; Heb. 10: 14. (o) Identity in the mode of 
 justification, in respect to all that are to be saved. A common salvation 
 of all presupposes a common faith and a common and the same mode of 
 justification. Acts 4: 12 ; 15 : 11 ; Rom. 3 : 22-26. (4) Assurance in 
 us, not conjectural, but infallible and divine. Rom. 8 : 25, 38, 39 ; 
 5: 1, 2 ; Eph. 3 : 12 ; 1 John 3 : 14. (5) Growth, not as to the act 
 which is instantaneous, but in regard to faith and the consciousness of 
 justification. 2 Cor. 10: 15; Col. 1 : 10 ; 2 Pet. 3 : 18 ; Eph. 4: 14, 
 15; (6) Constant continuance. For as the forgiveness of sins, so also 
 our justification is renewed daily, and not only in the first beginning, 
 but faith daily is* imputed to the believer for righteousness, and thus 
 our justification is continuous, Rev. 22: 11 ; (7) Amissibility, Ez. 18: 
 24; Heb. 6: 5, 6; John 15 : 2; (8) Recoverableness, John 6: 37; Rom. 
 5: 20. The prodigal son is an example, Luke 15." 
 
 § 43. Concomitants and Consequences of Justifying Faith. 
 
 Having discussed faith as the means by which we partake of 
 salvation, and justification as the effect of faith, there remain to 
 be described the internal conditions and the moral change which 
 occur in man at the same time with and after justification. But 
 these, however, are also operations of the Holy Ghost. Agree- 
 ably to the order in which the Holy Spirit produces them,* we 
 
 * Holl. (795): "The acts of applying grace, according to the order in which 
 they cohere, and follow one another, are the call, illumination, conversion, regen- 
 eration, justification, mystical union with the triune God, renovation, preserva- 
 tion of faith and holiness, glorification." Thus they are enumerated by nearly all 
 the later Dogmaticians. Justification, which we have already discussed, we now 
 omit. Holl. (ib.) thus vindicates this arrangement : " This order, and, as it were, 
 concatenated series of acts of applying grace, we learn from Acts 26: 17, where 
 Christ says to Paul, ' I send thee to the Gentiles ; ' behold the grace of the call ! 
 ' That thou mayest open their eyes ; ' behold the illumination ! ' To turn them 
 from darkness to light ; ' behold the act of conversion ! ' And from the power of 
 Satan unto God ; ' behold regeneration itself, through which we become the sons 
 of God! 'That they may receive forgiveness of sins;' behold justification! 
 'And have inheritance among them which are sanctified through faith in me ; ' 
 behold union with Christ by faith, sanctification, the preservation of holiness, and 
 glorification ! " In the Symb. Books the same order is indicated (as also now and 
 then by the Dogmaticians of the period next following their preparation) but only 
 in passing, viz., in the Small Catech., Art. 3, and Form. Conc, Sol. Dec, II, 50. 
 
448 APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION. 
 
 enumerate : 1. The Call; 2. Illumination ; 3. Regeneration and 
 Conversion ; 4. Mystical Union; 5. Renovation. 
 
 § 44. (1.) Vocation. 
 
 " The Call is the act of grace by which the Holy Spirit mani- 
 fests by means of the Word of God his will in regard to the sal- 
 vation of sinners to those persons who are out of the Church, and 
 offers them benefits from Christ the Eedeemer, that they may be 
 led to the Church, converted, and obtain eternal salvation." 
 Holl. (803). [1] The grace of God, through which he desires to 
 effect man's salvation, begins with the Call, for God must present 
 salvation to man, since uncalled, man would noj even desire it. 
 It is distinguished as indirect and direct, or, what is here equiva- 
 lent, as general and special. [2] By the former is understood the 
 call, which reaches man through conscience and the natural 
 knowledge of God, and thus awakens only in general an unde- 
 fined longing for salvation, which is yet unknown to him ; by the 
 latter, the call, which comes through the preaching of the Gos- 
 pel, and directly invites to entrance into the kingdom of God, to 
 conversion and to the reception of salvation in Christ ; and only 
 this is what is here discussed. It is not merely an external call, 
 but is invariably accompanied by the influences of the Holy 
 Spirit, of such a kind that the person so called cannot fail to 
 perceive the drawing of the Holy Spirit, and that his conscience 
 testifies that he has great reason to follow this call; it is, there- 
 fore, at once as seriously intended as it is always efficacious. [3] 
 As, in the preaching of the Gospel, the only possibility is afforded, 
 by which man can obtain salvation through Jesus Christ (the 
 instrumental cause is the external preaching of the Word. Kom. 
 10 : 17 ; 2 Thess. 2 : 14), [4] God makes use of this as the means 
 through which he sends the call to men; and, according as he 
 calls them through men whom he appoints and urges to do 
 this, [5] or immediately, and without their instrumentality, the 
 
 The " three ways of the Mystics" are rejected, according to which "he who is 
 called to the Church can expeditiously reach the sacred mount of perfection and 
 deification by three ways : the purifying, the illuminating, and the uniting." The 
 reason [for this rejection] : " because neither are these arranged in proper order, 
 nor do the men who pursue them certainly reach the goal fixed by the Mystics." 
 
THE GKACIOUS CALL. 449 
 
 call is designated as mediate or immediate, and consequently as 
 ordinary or extraordinary. [6] Only in extraordinary cases, how- 
 ever, does God call otherwise than through human instrumental- 
 ity. The reason of God's calling is to be found altogether and 
 only in his pity for the wretchedness in which men lie, so long 
 as they do not partake of the salvation of Christ. [7] Therefore, 
 as all men are in the same condemnation, this call is addressed to 
 all without distinction, and is therefore universal; and this (a) 
 on account of the purpose of God, who earnestly wishes that all 
 men should come to the knowledge of the truth, 1 Tim. 2: 4; 
 2 Pet. 3 : 9 ; (b) on account of the command of Christ, Matt. 11 : 
 28; (c) on account of the message itself for all men in the whole 
 world have been called, Mark 16 : 20 ; Eom. 10 : 18. The uni- 
 versality of the call, consists, however, not in that God has called 
 all individuals in the different ages of the world ; but in that 
 he provides that the preaching through which the call is to be 
 extended to men, could, in general, in some way reach all nations, 
 and thus also all individuals. [8] 
 
 The call is, therefore, extended equally to all men, inasmuch 
 as saving grace is offered to all men through the same means; 
 but an inequality occurs in regard to the order, the manner, and 
 the time of the call, for to some it comes earlier than to others; 
 some receive the preaching of the Gospel immediately from 
 heralds sent by God, while others receive it at third hand. [9] 
 
 The proof that the call has reached all nations and all indi- 
 viduals, it is not indeed easy for us to produce, but from history 
 and revelation we know the following: First, that there were 
 three times in which God caused the news of salvation to be sol- 
 emnly proclaimed in such a manner that thereby, upon each 
 occasion, opportunity was given to all then living to hear it ; 
 whereby, at the same time, it became possible for them to hand 
 down these glad tidings to all their posterity. These periods 
 were, the days of Adam, of jSToah, and of the Apostles. [10] 
 
 If then, in the. course of time, some people be found who are 
 entirely ignorant of the preaching of the Gospel, this does not 
 militate against the universality of the call, but arises from this, 
 that these people did not faithfully preserve the truth preached 
 to them or did not lay it to heart, in consequence of which their 
 
450 APPLICATION OF KEDEMPTION. 
 
 posterity have to suffer. It is through their guilt that the call 
 which God designed to be universal became particular. [11] 
 
 Moreover, we know that God did not limit his solemn call to 
 the three occasions we have cited, but that he also adopted all 
 kinds of expedients whereby the call afterwards could reach 
 nations and individuals. [12] Why God, however, caused the 
 call to be more directly addressed to some nations than to others 
 is indeed unknown to us, for the purposes and ways of God are 
 confessedly unfathomable. But this cannot confuse us in regard 
 to the doctrine that God's purpose in the call was universal, for 
 this purpose is most clearly declared in Scripture. [13] 
 
 [1] Quen.'s extended definition (III, 466) : " Calling is the act of 
 the applying grace of the Holy Spirit, by which he manifests towards 
 the whole race of fallen man the most gracious will of God through the 
 external preaching of the Word, in itself always sufficient and effective, 
 and offers to all men the benefits obtained through the merit of the Re- 
 deemer, with the serious intention that all may be saved by Christ, and 
 be presented with eternal life." 
 
 [2] In the former manner Kg. and Quen. distinguish ; in the latter. 
 Holl. Quen. (Ill, 461) : " Taken widely, it includes likewise the indi- 
 rect call, which arises from the consideration of the universe, its gov- 
 ernment, and the divine beneficence towards creatures, Rom. 1: 19, 20; 
 2: 14, 15; Acts 17: 27; likewise by the general and obscure rumor 
 concerning a certain assembly in which it is said the true God is known 
 and worshipped, 1 Kings 10: 1 ; 2 Kings 5: 2, 3; 1 Thess. 1: 8. The 
 methods of vocation just enumerated are rather invitations and incite- 
 ments to inquire about the true worship of God and the assembly in 
 which it flourishes, than the call properly so called ; the reason is, they 
 have not for their proximate arml immediate end the eternal salvation of 
 man or the knowledge of Christ, the Redeemer, and the mysteries neces- 
 sary for the attainment of eternal salvation, but only the leading of man 
 to the gate of the true Church." 
 
 The term is strictly taken, as it signifies the direct call by which God 
 calls men to faith and repentance, by means of the Word read or 
 preached, and offers to them the grace of conversion by w T hich men 
 may be converted and partake of salvation. 
 
 Holl. (803): "A general ^ and pedagogical call to the Church is that 
 by which God more obscurely and from afar invites sinners who are out 
 oi the Church to inquire in regard to the true worship of God and the 
 
THE ALWAYS EFFICACIOUS CALL. 451 
 
 assembly in which it flourishes, and leads them to the gate of the 
 Church. The general call occurs: (a) Objectively by the manifesta- 
 tion of the government and the divine beneficence towards creatures ; 
 (6) Efficaciously by the efficacious divine influence and impulse, by 
 which, both from theoretic and practical innate notions, and from proofs 
 of the divine benignity, practical conclusions are produced in the minds 
 of unbelievers to inquire, although in an unequal degree, concerning 
 the true worship of God; (c) Cumulatively through the rumor con- 
 cerning the Church spread over the world." 
 
 [3] Quex. (Ill, 463) : " The form of the call consists in a serious 
 (Matt. 23 : 37) and by the divine intention always sufficient (Rom. 8 : 
 30) and always efficacious (Rom. 1 : 16) manifestation of the will of 
 God and offer of the blessings procured by Christ." (Id. 464) : " No 
 call of God, whether of itself and its intrinsic quality or of the intention 
 of God, is inefficacious, so that it cannot and should not produce a salu- 
 tary effect, but every call is efficacious (for the preached Word of God 
 has a divine and sufficient power and efficacy to effect regeneration, con- 
 version, etc., by the ordination and appointment of God himself), al- 
 though it may be prevented from attaining its effect by men presenting an 
 obstacle, and thus becomes inefficacious by the fault of the wicked and per- 
 verse icill of men" The distinction made by the Calvinists between an 
 external and an internal call is therefore rejected. Qden. (Ill, 466) : 
 " The Calvinists make a distinction between an external and internal 
 call, and exhibit both : (a) In reference to their origin ; because the 
 former is made through the ministry of the Word offered to all or some 
 externally, the other by the Holy Spirit illuminating and guiding w ithin 
 the hearts of the elect, (b) In reference to their subjects; because the 
 former is common to the elect and the reprobate, the other peculiar to 
 the elect, so that the reprobate never partake of it. (c) In reference 
 to the efficacy ; because the latter, alone being efficacious and irresisti- 
 ble, not only enlightens the mind, but also bends the will, and never, 
 when it once takes possession of the mind, can be abolished or extin- 
 guished; but the former without this would be useless and ineffectual to 
 salvation. We admit the distinction, but not so as to oppose the exter- 
 nal to the internal call, nor to separate one from the other, as the exter- 
 nal call is the medium and instrument of the internal, and by this God 
 works efficaciously in the hearts of men. If the external did not ex- 
 actly correspond to the internal call, if a person might be called exter- 
 nally and not internally, it would be vain, fallacious, illusory." 
 
 [4] In regard to the call which comes to men by the preaching of the 
 Gospel and by that of the law, Holl. (807): "God calls poor sin- 
 
452 APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION. 
 
 ners directly and savingly to the Church by the Gospel (2 Thess. 2 : 
 14), to which also baptism pertains (John 3: 5). Nevertheless the 
 divine Law contributes something to the call of sinners, but only indi- 
 rectly, negatively, and accidentally." 
 
 Ap. Conf. (V, 51) : " God terrifies by the Law, that there may be 
 place for consolation and vivification, because hearts secure and not per- 
 ceiving the wrath of God despise consolation." 
 
 [5] Quen. (Ill, 463) : " The ministerial cause is either the ordinary 
 minister of the word, Matt. 22 : 3, or whenever any other person out 
 of the usual order, with whatever intention, shall have announced the 
 Word, 2 Kings 5 : 7." 
 
 [6] Quen. (Ill, 462) : «■« The mediate call is that by which God in 
 the Old Testament called some by the ministry of angels, or men, and 
 now, since the institution of the Gospel ministry, calls by men alone. 
 We use the term immediate, not with reference to the medium or Word, 
 without which no salutary call can take place, but in reference to men, 
 because God himself presented the Word without human assistance. 
 Thus Gen. 12: 1; Acts 9: 3, 4." 
 
 " Ordinary vocation is that which is accomplished by the divinely 
 appointed means, that is, by the external and visible ministry of the 
 Word. Extraordinary is when any one is called to the light of the 
 Gospel, not by the ordinary ministry, but by miracles, trances and other 
 extraordinary means. Thus the Magi, Matt. 2 : 1 ; the robber, Luke 
 23: 42. The extraordinary call is special and very rare ; formerly, in- 
 deed, under the Old Testament and in the commencement of the New, 
 it occurred ; but now, since the Gospel has been universally preached 
 and the Church planted by the apostles, it has clearly ceased. Further, 
 a distinction is made between the solemn call, which occurs through the 
 preached Word, and the less solemn, which occurs through the read 
 Word or that which may be read." 
 
 [7] Quen. (Ill, 463) : "The impelling and moving internal cause is 
 nothing but the mercy and goodness of God founded in the merit of 
 Christ, 2 Tim. 1:9; the external is the utter misery of man." Holl. 
 (806) : " Human wretchedness is not the cause of God's gracious call, 
 but it gave occasion to his commiseration." 
 
 [8] Holl. (809) : " When we say that the call to God's kingdom is 
 universal, we do not assert that the doctrine of the Gospel was actually 
 announced to each and every man openly and immediately by ministers 
 specially sent, but that God most merciful has so clearly made known 
 the doctrine of the Gospel concerning obtaining salvation by faith in 
 Christ, that all men, without exception, can arrive at the knowledge of 
 
UNIVERSALITY OF THE CALL. 453 
 
 it, so that God has not by a divine decree denied to any nation or any 
 person the benefit of the doctrine or the way by which he may attain to 
 its knowledge." 
 
 [9] Holl. (816) : " Ordinary calling is equal in substance, or so far 
 as it is essentially considered (because we are called by grace equally 
 salutary, because the same powers of believing are offered to all, because 
 we are called by the same means, by the same Gospel, by the same bap- 
 tism of equal efficacy, if you regard the divine purpose), but it is 
 unequal in regard to order, mode, degree, time, and interval. As to 
 the order, the Gospel was first to be preached to the Jews and after- 
 wards to the Gentiles, Acts 13: 46. As to the mode and degree, some 
 have received more, others less light. Some nations are called by the 
 Word solemnly preached, others by the Word written and read, others 
 by the diffused rumors of the Church, of which some are nearer and 
 clearer and others more remote and obscure. In regard to time and in- 
 terval, some nations were called earlier, others later. To some the light 
 of the Gospel shone for a longer time, to others it became obscure after 
 a few years. Inasmuch as we cannot, in this present mortal state, en- 
 tirely fathom this accidental inequality, let us acquiesce in God's dis- 
 pensation of the means of salvation ; let us acknowledge and admire, 
 but not anxiously explore, the abyss of the divine judgments inscrutable 
 to human minds. Rom. 11: 33." 
 
 [10] Hutt. (Loc. Com., 788) : " God has revealed his Word at least 
 three times to the whole world. First, after the creation of the world, 
 in the Adamitic Church. Then, after the deluge, in the house and 
 family of Noah. Then, after the ascension of Christ to heaven, in the 
 departure and dispersion of the apostles into the whole world. (Con- 
 cerning the apostolic age it was said : ' Where the Apostolate does not 
 come, the Epistle does.' — quo non venit aixoarokf}, eo kmoTolr). Rom. 10: 
 18.) Here doubtless it became altogether easy that the word of divine 
 grace should be always retained by their posterity, and, what could just 
 as well happen, be similarly propagated to others." N. B. — Very 
 properly, the Dogmaticians do not date the call from the time of the 
 New Testament revelation, since the antecedent revelations have the 
 same end in view, and together constitute but one revelation ; where- 
 fore, also, when they designate the Church as the terminus vocationis 
 ad quern, i. <?., the place to which we are called, they understand this in 
 the widest sense, embracing Israel, also, as belonging to it. 
 
 [11] Grh. (IV, 188) : "The call is universal, as to God who issues 
 it, but it becomes special through the fault of man: First, inasmuch as 
 some reject it with epicurean contempt ; some also persecute and vio- 
 
454 APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION. 
 
 lently repel it. Then, inasmuch as by the fault of ancestors the lost 
 Word is not always in fact preached in all nations and places." Holl. 
 (810): "That the Gentiles formerly, and now many nations, are desti- 
 tute of the preaching of the Gospel, is their own fault, not the will and 
 plan of God, denying them arbitrarily the light of the Gospel. For, 
 
 (1) Those nations despise the Word of God and maliciously reject it; 
 
 (2) They neglect the call and knowledge of Christian doctrines and 
 rites in general, known by report to all the world; (3) They do not 
 apply to a proper use the instructive and effective call, viz., so as to in- 
 quire after the true worship of God and the assembly in which it pre- 
 vails. For which reason they deprive themselves, by their own faults, 
 of the salutary call which is made by the preaching of the Gospel." To 
 the objection, the son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, Hutt. 
 (789) replies : "The meaning of our thesis is this, that the descendants 
 suffer on account of the fault of their parents in this, that they are born 
 without the Church ; but not that, on account of the ingratitude of their 
 parents, all power of hearing the divine Word, or even salvation itself, 
 is cut off from or denied to them. The former we assert, the latter we 
 deny. The former is merely a temporal punishment, which still does 
 not exclude or prevent them from coming to the Church and hearing 
 the Word of God, although born without the Church. . . . For now, 
 just as formerly, God has placed the Church in a prominent position, 
 so that the tidings concerning God and the religion of Christians diffuse 
 themselves among all nations and people that are under heaven. But 
 now, because those people partly cling contumaciously to the idolatrous 
 folly of their parents and ancestors, and partly ridicule the true worship 
 of God, and treat it with contempt, they surely do not now bear the sins 
 of their parents, but are to be regarded as perishing and being con- 
 demned by the just judgment of God for their own fault." 
 
 And Grh. (IV, 190): "If the case of Gentile children be adduced, 
 the answer to this and similar things is, the judgments of God may be 
 hidden ; they can never be unjust. Many things pertaining to this head 
 of doctrine are beyond our reach by the light of nature and of grace, 
 which we will at some time understand better by the light of glory. 
 These children not only derive a taint of corruption from their parents, 
 but likewise spring from such ancestors as were intrusted with the 
 precious deposit of his Word, that was to be handed down to their de- 
 scendants, and the Sacraments, by which also their children might be 
 received to the grace of God. They accuse, therefore, the sins of par- 
 ents, not the justice and mercy of God. Nor do we improperly require 
 that these objectors should satisfy us that their children, if they had 
 
UNIVERSALITY OF THE CALL. 455 
 
 attained maturity, would have received the proffered grace of God, and 
 not rather have imitated the sins of their parents." 
 
 [12] Hutt. (Loc. Com., 789) : " So foul was the ingratitude of the 
 greater portion in this matter (at the time of the preaching in those 
 three great periods), that it cast away that treasure, as well to its own 
 loss, as what is worse, by its own fault. But nevertheless, in the midst 
 of this stupendous ingratitude of the world, and contempt of the Word, 
 God still wished that the rays of his mercy should shine forth in this, 
 that the Church of God (or the people who for the time being carefully 
 cherished the incomparable treasure of the divine Word), was always 
 assigned a prominent place in the world, so that any nation or people, if 
 not extremely unconcerned, could readily be acquainted with the preach- 
 ing of the divine Word. As indeed, even to-day, the Christian religion 
 cannot but be sufficiently accessible to Jews and Turks, as those who 
 are everywhere living in the midst of Christians, unless they themselves 
 prevent it by extreme obstinacy." Holl. (810): " Although, except 
 in most recent times, the universal, stated and actual preaching of the 
 divine Word, did not always and everywhere extend to all nations ; yet 
 God did not altogether withhold the universal call from any nation, nor 
 refuse to any m«n access to the Church. For God calls many nations, 
 (a) by a less formal call; (b) through the tidings concerning the 
 Church, diffused far and wide ; (c) through the proofs of the divine 
 goodness everywhere obvious in the kingdom of nature ; (d) through an 
 effective divine impulse, by which practical inferences are suggested 
 and consciences are stimulated to inquire concerning the true worship of 
 God and the assembly in which it flourishes." 
 
 [13] Quen. (Ill, 465): " That God bestows the light of the Gospel 
 upon one nation, while another is neglected ; that some Turks, Ameri- 
 cans, and other barbarians are converted to the faith, others who are 
 their equals are left in their unbelief; this must also be ascribed to the 
 hidden and unsearchable judgment of God. It must be acknowledged 
 that God does some things in regard to the order, mode, time, and de- 
 gree of the call according to his sovereign pleasure." But Grh.' (IV, 
 191): " But let us admit, that in these and similar special cases, we can- 
 not find out and explain exactly the causes of the divine counsels ; nev- 
 ertheless we must by no means have recourse to the absolute decree of 
 reprobation, but adhere firmly to those asserted general statements, 1 Tim. 
 2:4; Ez. 33:11." 
 
 The Symbolical Books abide by the simple statement : " That not only 
 the preaching of repentance, but likewise the promise of the Gospel is 
 universal, that is, it pertains to all men (Form. Conc, II, 28), and 
 
456 APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION. 
 
 that the call is effected by the Word ; without investigating further the 
 cases which occur, and which present a seeming contradiction to the 
 doctrine of the universality of the call." 
 
 § 45. (2.) Illumination* 
 
 As, to the natural man everything spiritual is foolishness, and 
 he cannot perceive it, but, on the other hand, many prejudices 
 and doubts prevent him from rightly understanding that which is 
 spiritual, the call would be fruitless, if the Holy Spirit did not 
 so operate that the Gospel should appear in its true light and 
 significance to man. [1] 
 
 On this account the further operation of the Holy Spirit aims 
 at the removal of this folly of the natural man, at displacing his 
 doubts and prejudices, and furnishing him correct knowledge and 
 comprehension of the substance and meaning of the Gospel. 
 The aim, therefore, here is not only an external knowledge of 
 the plan of salvation, but an internal knowledge ; [2] the open- 
 ing of man's mind for the due appreciation of the Gospel, the 
 removal of all hindrances, which might conceal from him God's 
 gracious plan of salvation, and that it may become internally 
 clear to him how miserable is his sinful condition, as shown in 
 the Scriptures, and what a remedy and comfort have been afforded 
 for it in the grace which is in Christ Jesus. [3] 
 
 The Holy Spirit having brought about such a result, every- 
 thing is done on the part of God, and it remains for the will of 
 man to determine whether this salvation is to be received. [4] 
 This is the effect which the Holy Spirit designs to produce by 
 illumination. " Illumination is the act of applying grace, by 
 which the Holy Spirit, through the ministry of the Word, 
 teaches a man who is a sinner and called to the Church, and con- 
 tinues to instruct him, in an ever-increasing measure, with the 
 earnest purpose to remove the darkness of ignorance and error, 
 and imbue him with the knowledge of the Word of God, by in- 
 
 * Hollazius alone discussed Illumination at length under a separate head ; and 
 the reason of this no doubt was, that the questions here treated of acquired a 
 special importance just at that time, partly in opposition to mysticism, and partly 
 to pietism, which was then making its appearance. Earlier Dogmaticians either 
 have no separate locus for illumination, or they treat of it very briefly, as Calo- 
 vius, who places it among the features of the call. 
 
ILLUMINATION. 457 
 
 stilling from the Law the conviction of sin, and from the Gospel 
 the apprehension of divine mercy, founded upon the merit of 
 Christ." [5] Holl. (819). Illumination is, accordingly, more im- 
 mediately an operation of the Holy Spirit upon the intellect of 
 man ; he directs himself however in this act at least mediately 
 to the will, in as far as this illumination is designed, by convict- 
 ing of the misery of sin, which it produces, and by presenting 
 the grace of God, to conduct to conversion and the sanctification 
 of the will. [6] It takes place in every man, who lays to heart 
 the call of the Holy Spirit, and opens his ear and heart, and not 
 without this, as the Holy Spirit never works by constraint and 
 never when man resists ; [7] and he never comes to men except 
 through the divine Word, [8] of which its ministers are the ve- 
 hicle, [9] and which those who desire to be illuminated must 
 permit to work in them in prayer and religious meditation. [10] 
 
 As the Word of God is divided into Law and Gospel, so can 
 illumination, as it is effected by the one or the other, be distin- 
 guished as legal or evangelical; and, according to the diverse 
 mission, intrusted to the Law and the Gospel respectively, the 
 former will reveal to man his sins and the wrath of God conse- 
 quent upon them, and the other grace in Christ ; [11] and the 
 effect will be different in these respects, that the one will cause 
 only terror and the other comfort in view of the proffered salva- 
 tion. Hence, it is only the influence proceeding from the Gospel 
 that is really efficient in securing salvation, while that proceed- 
 ing from the Law is rather preparatory to the former. [12] 
 
 Like all other knowledge, that produced by the Holy Spirit is 
 not instantaneous, but gradual, as may be seen from this, that the 
 knowledge here spoken of consists of various particulars, which 
 follow one another in natural order. [13] And as in the order 
 of nature, external precedes internal knowledge, so here the 
 Holy Spirit produces an external, which is preparatory to the in- 
 ternal knowledge, and then produces the internal, so that there 
 may be further a distinction between a literal and a pedagogic 
 illumination, and one that is spiritual and entirely saving. [14] 
 But as man attains the one as well as the other kind of knowl- 
 edge only upon proper conduct on his part in reference to the 
 grace ministered to him, the operation of the Holy Spirit, if the 
 30 
 
458 APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION. 
 
 will of man do not proceed further, may also be restricted to the 
 first ; or, the operations of the Spirit may be restricted also to 
 the intellect, and not extend to the will of man as they should, [15] 
 in which case the object of the Holy Spirit is not entirely ac- 
 complished in man, and the illumination is not perfect; [16] 
 wherefore, however, it still cannot be denied, that this first stage 
 of illumination is effected by the Holy Spirit. [17] 
 
 [1] Holl. (850): "In an unilluminated man there is not merely a 
 negative ignorance, but also an ignorance of depraved inclination, which 
 is error contrary to true knowledge, because the natural man not only 
 does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, but they are foolishness 
 unto him, 1 Cor. 2: 14. Therefore, not only mere ignorance, but like- 
 wise carnal-mi ndedness (Rom. 8: 6), and the wisdom of this world 
 (1 Cor. 1 : 20) are opposed to a saving knowledge. The world has its 
 wisdom, but it is immersed in the darkness of arrogance, so as to array 
 itself against the wisdom of God, 2 Cor. 10 : 5." 
 
 [2] Holl. (819) : "An objective illumination is not intended here, 
 presenting externally the light of the divine Word, but an effective one, 
 in which the Holy Spirit enkindles the light of knowledge, and subjec- 
 tive illumination, in which the blind sinner permits himself to be en- 
 lightened by the operation of the Holy Spirit. (Id. 851.) When we 
 represent illumination as the impartation of knowledge, we do not mean 
 merely external, which is produced by the tongue or pen of the minister 
 of the Church, but likewise internal, by which the Holy Spirit, by his 
 own special and gracious concurrence, enkindles the light of supernat- 
 ural wisdom, through the divine Word preached or read, in the hearts 
 of hearers or readers who do not maliciously oppose it." 
 
 [3] Holl. (850) : " Blindness of the intellect, filled with the dark- 
 ness of ignorance and error (Eph. 4 : 18), is the starting-point of illumi- 
 nation. The saving light of knowledge is its goal. By the Law is the 
 knowledge of sin, Rom. 3 : 20. The knowledge of the glorious grace 
 of God, unveiled in the face of Jesus Christ, proceeds from the Gospel, 
 2 Cor. 4 : 6. Assent attends this knowledge, by which man enlightened 
 regards as sure and beyond doubt all that is revealed in the Word of 
 God, particularly the Gospel message concerning the remission of sins 
 and the* eternal salvation to be secured through Christ, which undoubt- 
 ing assent is called eleyxog, conviction of the intellect, Heb. 11 : 1." 
 
 [4] Holl. (820): "The first and principal design of illumination is 
 to prepare man for conversion. For thus the natural darkness, the 
 ignorance of the mysteries, and the errors opposed to them, are expelled 
 
INFLUENCE OF ILLUMINATION UPON INTELLECT AND WILL. 459 
 
 by grace from the mind of man, and he is imbued with a knowledge of 
 God and of sacred things, and illuminated, as if by a light, so that he is 
 prepared to receive justifying grace. This illuminating grace, there- 
 fore, precedes the completion of conversion." 
 
 [5] Holl. (850): "Divine illumination consists formally in the 
 instruction of the Holy Spirit by means of the read or preached Word, 
 not merely external, but likewise internal, and penetrating efficaciously 
 the inmost recesses of the human heart, so that the darkness of ignor- 
 ance and error is expelled, and the light of supernatural knowledge is 
 infused into it." Id. (819) : " Enlightening grace is called teaching 
 grace, because the Holy Spirit, in enlightening, teaches all things 
 necessary to salvation, John 14: 26; likewise anointing grace, from 1 
 John 2: 20, 27 ; opening of the eyes of the mind, Acts 26 : 18 ; for, as 
 a blind person obtains the power of seeing by the opening of his eyes, 
 so the sinner, filled with the darkness of ignorance, receives, by the 
 illumination of the Holy Spirit, the power of knowing the true God." 
 
 [6] Holl. (828) : " First, the intellect of the sinner led to the 
 Church is immediately enlightened (2 Cor. 4:6; Eph. 1 : 18) ; subse- 
 quently and mediately, the will also, Tit. 2: 11, 12. The saving grace 
 of God which, like the beneficent sun, has appeared to all men, teaches 
 the intellect of the sinner, and sheds upon it the light of knowledge, so 
 that this light is diffused upon the will to enable it to flee from wicked- 
 ness and choose holiness of life. Therefore the apostle desires for the 
 Colossians illumination, that they may be sanctified, Col. 1 : 9, 10." 
 The difference between illumination and regeneration is this (832) : 
 " The former has respect more to the intellect, regeneration more to 
 the will; the former consists formally in knowledge concerning sacred 
 things from the divine Word, the latter consists formally in the gift of 
 faith. The effect of the former is a knowledge of the divine mysteries ; 
 the effect of the latter is confidence in the merits of Christ. The 
 former precedes, the latter follows." The difference between illumina- 
 tion and sanctification is (ib.) : " All Christians agree that sanctifica- 
 tion, taken in a broader sense, embraces all the acts of applying grace ; 
 taken in a narrower sense, it differs from illumination (1) in regard to 
 the particular subject, because by illumination the intellect, proximately 
 and formally, and by sanctification the will, is made perfect; (2) in 
 regard to the extent, because more men are illuminated than sanctified ; 
 (3) in regard to their peculiar effect and design, because the effect of 
 illumination is -yvuotc, or the supernatural knowledge of God and divine 
 things, Eph. 1 : 18 ; 2 Cor. 4: 6, but the effect of sanctification is holi- 
 ness and righteousness, Eph. 4 : 24." 
 
460 APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION. 
 
 [7] Id. (827) : "The most gracious God seriously designs to illumin- 
 ate all men, but only they are actually illuminated who, called and led to 
 the Church, receive the grace of the Holy Spirit, and listen attentively 
 to the divine Word, read it, and meditate upon it. The grace of the 
 Holy Spirit is not irresistible, for the sinner, if obstinately perverse, 
 may hinder the supernatural illumination of the Holy Spirit by opposing 
 a veil or malicious obstacle, 2 Cor. 4:3,4. But the sinner not obsti- 
 nately opposing, is efficaciously enlightened by the Holy Spirit through 
 the Word of God, Ps. 119 : 130." 
 
 [8] Id. (820) : " The Holy Spirit does not immediately, but by 
 means of the divine Word, enlighten us, 2 Pet. 1 : 18, 19." (Quali- 
 fied, however, with great care (825), "the power of illumination which 
 pertains to the divine Word is not accurately confined to the acts of 
 hearing, reading, or meditation ; but the Word of God heard, read, or 
 conveyed to the mind, and retained by it, always retains its illuminating 
 power.") (821): "God hath not promised in his Word that any man 
 by ecstasy shall be illuminated, his faith be confirmed, and a foretaste of 
 eternal life be imparted ; in opposition to the Platonics, the Quakers, 
 the Mystics." Definition of ecstasy (trance) : " It is a rare and extra- 
 ordinary operation either of God, or a corrupt imagination, or the devil, 
 alienating the mind of a man from his bodily senses, so that, the use of 
 the latter ceasing, he becomes more ready and quick to receive the 
 objects of imagination. It differs from rapture, because ecstasy simply 
 denotes a departure of the mind from the senses, but rapture adds 
 violence." 
 
 [9] Id. (826) : " The Holy Spirit truly and really enlightens the 
 souls of men in darkness in regard to sacred things by means of minis- 
 ters of the Word, performing in the right way the public office of teach- 
 ing, Eph. 3: 8, 9; 2 Cor. 4:6; Acts 26: 18; John 5: 35; Matt. 5: 14." 
 
 [10] Id. (844) : " To obtain spiritual illumination, three auxiliaries 
 are necessary: prayer (Luke 11: 13; Eph. 1: 17, 18), meditation 
 (John 5 : 39), trials (Ps. 119 : 71). The following positions are, in 
 addition, opposed to the erroneous views of the Mystics and Quietists : 
 
 "I. The illumination and regeneration of the sinner do not take 
 place by the purgation or abstraction of the soul from created objects, 
 and the turning of it in upon itself." The following explanations are 
 added : 
 
 "(a) We do not disallow all abstraction of the mind from foreign 
 objects and secular cares in the actual use of the Word and in godly 
 meditations and prayers. We oppose that abstraction or annihilation by 
 which the mind is presumed to be withdrawn from all creatures and 
 from the divine gifts, and loses itself in God. 
 
MEANS OF ILLUMINATION. 461 
 
 " (b) We do not condemn all resignation, since our divines inculcate 
 a temperate and godly resignation (Gelassenheit). We reject that resig- 
 nation which involves the destruction of all the affections, desires, and 
 thoughts. 
 
 " (c) We must distinguish from the descent into the heart or soul 
 for the purpose of bringing to remembrance sin or the state of misery, 
 and to search for repentance and faith, and to apprehend the inner light 
 immediately revealing. •. . . The present controversy has respect to 
 the introversion of the mind upon itself, to wait for, and observe, and 
 apprehend the internal light, immediately making revelations." 
 
 II. (847) : " So far from expecting in silence a supernatural divine 
 light, the external Word of God, which is a most clear light, is on the 
 contrary to be earnestly preached, carefully heard, frequently read, at- 
 tentively pondered, and, in addition, devout prayers, mingled with 
 sacred hymns, are to be raised to heaven, that the light of saving knowl- 
 edge may arise in our hearts, and continually increase." We add also 
 the following remarks : 
 
 (848) : " (a) When the Mystics distinguish between silence of 
 words, thoughts, and desires, we approve of the first silence, i. e., of 
 words in a certain respect ; for meditation on the divine Word is aided 
 by silence in our houses; but we disapprove of the silence of desires and 
 thoughts. 
 
 u (b) The expectation of divine assistance, united with silence, is 
 proper for true Christians, but not the silent expectation of directly reveal- 
 ing light. 
 
 "(c) The doctrine of an internal Sabbath of the soul, so far as it de- 
 notes (a) cessation from works of the flesh, (/?) rest of the soul in God, 
 (-y) meditation on the divine mercies, (6) the desire and expectation of 
 the eternal Sabbath, is retained and inculcated in our churches. But 
 an internal Sabbath is rejected, so far as it denotes not only a silence of 
 words, but of all the thoughts and senses." 
 
 [11] Id. (824): " Illumination, in respect to the illuminating means, 
 is either legal or evangelical. The former is that which manifests to us 
 sin, the wrath of God, and the temporal and eternal punishments of 
 sin (Rom. 7:7). The latter reveals to us the grace of God, founded on 
 the merit of Christ, righteousness accepted by God, and eternal life (2 
 Cor. 4:4)." 
 
 • " The Gospel \\\x\m\ nates the hearts of men, that they may know the 
 glory of Christ, raised indeed upon the cross, but conveyed to heaven, 
 and sitting at the right hand of God the Father. The Gospel there- 
 fore declares and manifests the mercy, the wisdom, and the justice of 
 God the Father, in the open face of Christ, who is his express image." 
 
462 APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION. 
 
 [12] Id. (825) : " The divine Law, like lightning, has a terrible, slay- 
 ing and condemning light. But the Gospel, like the beneficent sun, 
 diffuses an exhilarating and vivifying light, 2 Cor. 3 : 6-9. The Law 
 possesses salutary powers of pedagogical illumination, Gal. 3 : 24 (the 
 divine Law shows us and exposes both the native leprosy of the soul and 
 the diseases contracted voluntarily, and thus affords us the occasion of 
 seeking Christ, the physician of souls and the author of righteousness and 
 salvation). But from the Gospel a perfectly saving illumination arises 
 to those who properly use the evangelical doctrine according to the di- 
 vine purpose (which makes known the knowledge of salvation, by remis- 
 sion of sins, and reveals the tender mercy of our God, whereby the 
 dayspring from on high hath visited us, Luke 1 : 77, 78)." 
 
 [13] Id. (851) : " Ordinary illumination is not accomplished instan- 
 taneously, but by intervals, by degrees, by acts frequently repeated, that 
 man may be disposed and prepared to admit continuously more and 
 more light of the truth, so that if he should repel the first degree of 
 illumination, the Holy Spirit may deny him the next, for it cannot 
 occur without the first." 
 
 " Note. — We speak now of ordinary, not of extraordinary illumina 
 tion. We do not doubt that God ; by special and extraordinary grace, 
 and by his absolute power, can entirely illuminate a man at once, so that 
 he may be acquainted with all the articles of faith, since we know that 
 the Holy Spirit infused the gift of tongues into the apostles instantane- 
 ously." 
 
 [14] Id. (840): " Illumination in regard to man receiving the heav- 
 enly doctrine is either literal and pedagogic or spiritual and completely 
 saving. The former is that operation of the Holy Spirit by which, 
 through his grace externally assisting and preparing the way, he in- 
 structs with a literal knowledge of the doctrines of religion the intellect 
 of an unregenerate man, who is nevertheless inclining towards regener- 
 ation, and produces an historical assent to the gospel, so that he may be 
 more and more disposed to receive saving faith (John 1 : 9 ; 2 Pet. 1 : 
 19 ; Ps. 25 : 8; Eph. 3 : 9). The latter is the operation of the Holy 
 Spirit by which, entering and dwelling in the contrite heart of man, he 
 enkindles in him a saving knowledge of the divine mercy established in 
 Christ, produces a confiding assent to the gospel, and confirms and seals 
 it by his internal testimony." 
 
 Quen. (II, 77), expresses the distinction thus: i( Pedagogic illuminor- 
 tion is merely literal and external, when any one is instructed in the 
 knowledge of divine truth, and is convinced of its certainty in his con- 
 science, but has not this known truth as yet sealed in his heart with the 
 
REGENERATION AND CONVERSION. 463 
 
 seal, or confirmed by the gracious indwelling of the Holy Spirit ; spirit- 
 ual, gracious, and internal, when any one, for instance, truly regenerate, 
 not only has a literal understanding of the evangelical doctrine but is at 
 the same time the temple of the Holy Ghost, inhabited graciously by 
 him ; or, when the truth is not only known and admitted, but at the 
 same time is strengthened, confirmed, and sealed by the internal testi- 
 mony of the Holy Spirit graciously dwelling in the heart." 
 
 [15] Holl. (829): "As supernatural illumination is a successive act 
 of applying grace, therefore, without the sanctification of the will, the 
 illumination may be imperfect in the intellect. This is in opposition to 
 all the mystic writers, who regard the purgative process as antedating the 
 illuminative." 
 
 [16] Id. (843): "The sinner is illuminated pedagogically to the end 
 that he may be disposed and prepared for spiritual illumination, by 
 which not only his intellect is enlightened, but his will directed to the 
 love of God and his neighbor. If the sinner who is to be converted does 
 not attain this spiritual illumination, this knowledge of the latter is in- 
 sufficient, unfruitful, not saving, because it is not applied to its proper 
 use, and therefore it may be called finally false ; because the true end 
 designed by God is frustrated." Imperfect illumination, and pedagogi- 
 cal, is moreover ascribed by many divines to the grace of God assisting, 
 and perfect illumination to the grace of God indwelling. Illumination 
 is perfect only when grace dwells in man, and he permits his will to be 
 sanctified by it, in which case progress is made from it to sanctification. 
 
 [17] Imperfect and pedagogical illumination is also not natural, but 
 supernatural; (id., 831): "because (a) it proceeds from the light of a 
 special revelation ; (b) it is obtained by us through a supernatural influ- 
 ence of the Holy Spirit ; (c) it is occupied with the mysteries of faith ; 
 (c?) and is divinely designed for a spiritual end. We cannot but par- 
 ticularly notice that divines, truly orthodox, have never divided illum- 
 ination into natural and supernatural." 
 
 § 46. Be generation and Conversion 
 
 Are the terms descriptive of the state of one who has really 
 entered into the new kingdom of grace. Both the terms are 
 used in the Holy Scriptures, sometimes in a wider, at others in a 
 narrower sense, and often interchangeably. In the former case 
 they describe the entire state of acceptance of the pardoned sin- 
 ner with all the moral powers which are now at his command, 
 and embrace, therefore, in them justification and sanctification; 
 
464 APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION. 
 
 in the latter case, in which indeed they do not directly exclude 
 one another, but yet are also not exactly identical, they describe 
 simply the internal change, which has taken place with the en- 
 tire condition of man, without including the power to lead a holy 
 life. The two conceptions may be distinguished thus, that by 
 regeneration is understood only the actual presence of the new 
 spiritual life, as it is effected in man by the operation of the Holy 
 Spirit ; by conversion, the conditions also which must be per- 
 formed on the part of man in order that he may attain such a 
 spiritual life. [1] As thus the two expressions diverge in a cer- 
 tain sense, they may also be considered separately. 
 
 I. "Regeneration" is the act of grace by which the Holy Spirit 
 endows the sinner with saving faith, that, his sins being pardoned, 
 he may become a son of God and an heir of eternal life. [2] Holl. 
 (876): i. e., that work of God by which he overcomes the spirit- 
 ual blindness of the natural man, and his spiritual inability to 
 believe in the gracious plan of salvation, and creates in man the 
 power of exercising faith. [3] There takes place, therefore, in 
 the regeneration of man, a change [4] which consists in this, that 
 instead of the former blindness in spiritual things there is spirit- 
 ual knowledge, in place of unbelief there is faith, so that this so 
 entirely altered spiritual condition of man is represented figura- 
 tively by the term, a new birth, and the regenerate man as a new 
 creature. [5] 
 
 As regeneration is conditioned by the conduct of man in regard 
 to the influence exerted upon him, it will take place at once or 
 gradually, as man's resistance is greater or less. The former 
 takes place with children, in whom there is no other resistance 
 than that which dwells in every natural man ; this, however, is 
 overcome by the Holy Ghost, operating in baptism ; the latter 
 occurs with all adults, in the case of whom resistance only grad- 
 ually disappears. [6] 
 
 But the operation of the Holy Spirit is always, however, effi- 
 cacious, in such a sense that on God's part all the energies which 
 are needed to enable man to believe and lead a spiritual life are 
 readily and altogether sufficiently offered to him ; but this grace 
 is not compulsory, therefore not irresistible, for its acceptance 
 depends on the free will of man. [7] Therefore regeneration is 
 
CONVERSION. 465 
 
 likewise on the part of God indeed perfect, since he endeavors to 
 effect regeneration perfectly in man, and to transform him into 
 an entirely new creature ; on the side of man, however, only 
 more or less perfect as he permits this grace of the Holy Spirit 
 to be entirely or only partially efficacious in him. [8] 
 
 It depends, too, upon the fidelity of man, whether he will per- 
 severe in the new condition of regeneration or not, and thus re- 
 generation is also amissible ; but, at the same time, it is recov- 
 erable by the grace of God, for the way of return to the state of 
 regeneration, so long as life lasts, is open to him who has fallen 
 from grace. [9] 
 
 II. Conversion. — There is no other way of attaining to faith 
 and a spiritual life than by God's turning man from sin to him- 
 self, and " conversion is thus the act by which the Holy Spirit is 
 said to convert the sinner, and the sinner is said to be converted!!'' 
 (Holl. 852). [10.] 
 
 Conversion, then, is to be called a work of God, so far as this 
 change cannot at all be produced without the agency of divine 
 grace. So far, however, as this change cannot occur without an 
 internal movement in man, which is conditioned by his own will, 
 conversion in another point of view can be regarded as proceed- 
 ing from man. Conversion is accordingly distinguished as tran- 
 sitive and intransitive. [11] In the latter sense it is identical 
 with repentance, a movement of the mind excited by the con- 
 verting and regenerating grace of the Holy Spirit, by which the 
 sinner detests with unaffected sorrow his sins recognized from the 
 divine law, and at the same time lays hold by true faith of the 
 satisfaction and merit of the Mediator Christ, and the mercy of 
 God, obtained thereby and promised in the Gospel, and applies it 
 to himself that, having freely obtained the pardon of his sins, he 
 may be eternally saved." (Holl. 1141.) 
 
 The acts preceding conversion are more particularly the fol- 
 lowing : 
 
 1. The unconverted and unregenerate man, being from his birth 
 under the dominion of sin and his sinful propensities, manifesting 
 themselves in actual sins, the first act of grace aims to divert 
 man from this state of sin, and, with this end in view, to beget 
 in him real pain for past sins, and a desire to be freed from the 
 
466 APPLICATION OP REDEMPTION. 
 
 dominion which sin has exercised over him, viz., contrition (" a 
 serious and holy sorrow of heart, leading the sinner to hate the 
 sins made known to him by the law of God.") [12] 
 
 2. The second act of divine grace is this, that it drives man, 
 alarmed on account of his sins, to take refuge in the merit of 
 Christ, which covers his sins and is accounted as his; [13] so that 
 conversion, which commences in contrition, is finished in faith. 
 The latter is produced by the preaching of the law, the other by 
 the preaching of the Gospel. [14] 
 
 From what has been said, it follows that conversion, like re- 
 generation, does not take place at once, but is brought about by 
 repeated acts of one and the same grace. [15] This grace is va- 
 riously designated, as it produces the beginning or the progress 
 of conversion, and as it is efficacious with or without human co- 
 operation. [16] In the beginning of conversion man is thus alto- 
 gether passive ; [17] in the further progress of it, however, in so far 
 active as the powers produced by grace must in it be opera- 
 tive; [18] but as these powers are called forth by grace, and man 
 can do nothing at all by his natural powers, conversion is there- 
 fore to be considered as produced by grace alone. [19] It is 
 equally true of conversion as of regeneration, that it is indeed 
 efficacious, but not irresistible ; of both it is true that the impul- 
 sive internal cause is the mercy of God, the impulsive external or 
 meritorious cause is Christ's merit. 
 
 [1] Holl. alone deviates from this distinction, who first treats of 
 conversion, then of regeneration, and so separates them that the form 
 of conversion strictly taken consists in the excitation of contrition, the 
 form of regeneration in the donation of faith. (856) : "As it is one 
 act of applying grace by which God produces contrition, and another 
 act of grace by which he imparts to the contrite sinner a confidence that 
 relies on Christ's merit; so the former act of grace is called conversion 
 (taken in the strictest sense), and the latter act is called regeneration. 
 Contrition is the effect of converting grace, faith is the effect of regen- 
 erating grace. Penitence, taken in a wide sense, is the effect of both 
 acts of grace, viz., conversion and regeneration conspiring to accom- 
 plish one end." In this way, doubtless, the one idea is clearly distin- 
 guished from the other; but nevertheless Holl. is not able, in its further 
 discussion, to retain this distinction, and is compelled to connect faith 
 
REGENERATION A DIVINE ACT. 467 
 
 with conversion. Most of the other divines pursue the order of our 
 text, and desire, in treating the two aspects separately, rather to bring 
 out two phases of one and the same conception than to keep them alto- 
 gether apart from each other. Ordinarily this alone is given as the 
 difference : " The two differ: (1) in regard to the subjects ; regeneration 
 pertains to adults and children, conversion properly to adults, as chil- 
 dren cannot properly be said to be converted; (2) in regard to the 
 means : regeneration is effected by the Word and Sacraments, conver- 
 sion by the Word alone." 
 
 [2] Br. (532) : " Regeneration is an action of God, by which he en- 
 dows man, who is destitute of spiritual strength, but does not obstinately 
 resist, out of his mere grace for Christ's sake, by means of the Word 
 and Baptism, on the part of the intellect and the will, with spiritual 
 powers to believe in Christ, and thus to commence a spiritual life ; or, 
 he produces them in him in order that he may attain justification, reno- 
 vation, and eternal salvation." This is regeneration in the stricter 
 sense, as it is set forth in Gal. 2 : 20 ; John 1:13; 1 John 5 : 1. From 
 this, regeneration in the more comprehensive sense is distinguished." 
 Quex. (Ill, 477) : " It is taken in the wide sense for the restitution of 
 the spiritual life in general; and in this way regeneration comprehends 
 under it, also, justification and the renovation which follows it, in which 
 sense the Form. Conc. (Ill, 19) also uses it. It is taken strictly for 
 remission of sins or justification, in Gal. 3 : 11, in which sense the 
 Form. Conc. states it to be very frequently used in the Ap. Conf.; or 
 for renovation, as it shows it to be frequently used by Luther." Form. 
 Conc. (Sol. Dec, III, 19 and following): "The term regeneration is 
 sometimes taken in the sense, embracing both the remission of sins and 
 the subsequent renovation, which the Holy Spirit produces in those who 
 are justified by faith ; and it sometimes signifies nothing more than the 
 remission of sins, and adoption as sons of God. In this last sense the 
 word is very frequently used in the Ap. Conf.; for instance, when it is 
 said, justification is regeneration. But Paul, too, uses these terms with 
 discrimination (Tit. 3 : 5). Moreover, the term vivification is sometimes 
 so used as to denote remission of sins. For when a human being is jus- 
 fied by faith, that is in fact a regeneration, because he becomes from a 
 son of wrath a son of God, and in this way is transferred from death to 
 life. Hence, likewise, regeneration is often used for sanctification and 
 renovation (which are subsequent to justification)." 
 
 [3] Therefore Quen. (Ill, 482): " The point from which it proceeds 
 generically is the death of sin, not taken in its entirety (SltKtig), as it 
 introduces, in addition to a privation of powers of believing, likewise 
 
468 APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION. 
 
 a deficiency of strength for holy living, together with the dominion and 
 guilt of sin ; but taken partially (jusptK&g), so far as it affirms the want of 
 power of savingly knowing and embracing the justifying object. In 
 particular, on the side of the intellect, the starting-point is that great 
 blindness and multiform debility in regard to the saving knowledge of 
 the saving object, Eph. 5:8; John 1 : 5 ; 1 Cor. 2 : 14. On the part 
 of the will the like incapacity of embracing savingly the good offered in 
 the Gospel, Rom. 8 : 7. Its goal is generally speaking a spiritual life, 
 not viewed in its totality, as it includes, besides the attainment of the 
 powers of believing, immunity from the dominion and guilt of sin ; but 
 taken partially, so far as denotes the supernatural powers imparted for 
 the exercise of faith. In particular on the part of the intellect it is both 
 a spiritual capacity of the mind savingly to know the object which 
 brings salvation, 2 Cor. 4 : 6, and then an actual saving knowledge of 
 it ; on the part of the will a confident reclining of the heart on the known 
 good, Rom. 6: 11." Holl. remarks further (881): "We discuss now 
 principally the regeneration of the intellect and will of adult sinners ; 
 the regeneration of the intellect of children is somewhat more difficult 
 of comprehension. But we do not doubt that the intellect of infants in 
 regeneration is imbued with a saving knowledge of God by the Holy 
 Spirit in baptism, and their will is endowed with confidence in Christ. 
 We agree here with the views of Chmn. in Ex. c. Trid.: ' Although we 
 do not sufficiently understand, and cannot explain, what the action and 
 operation of the Holy Spirit is in infants who are baptized ; yet that it 
 exists and is effected through the Word of God, is certain. We call that 
 action and operation of the Holy Spirit in infants faith, and assert that 
 infants believe. For the means or organ, by which the kingdom of God 
 offered in the Word and Sacraments is received, the Scripture calls faith, 
 and it says that believers receive the kingdom of God. And indeed 
 (Mark 10 : 15) Christ affirms that adults receive the kingdom of heaven 
 as infants receive it.' The form of regeneration consists, according to 
 this, * in the gift of spiritual life ; that is, in the bestowment of the power 
 of believing, and of saving faith ; or, in the illumination of our mind, 
 and the production of confidence in our heart ;' or, as it is otherwise 
 expressed, ; in the gift itself of faith.' " 
 
 [4] But this spiritual change is not a substantial one (for there is not 
 another substance of intellect and will introduced by regeneration, the 
 pre-existing natural substance having been destroyed), but an acciden- 
 tal one (introducing new qualities into the intellect and will of man, not 
 merely enlightening and exciting the pre-existing). Quen. (Ill, 484): 
 "As in the resurrection of the body the flesh, numerically the same 
 
REGENERATION OF ADULTS AND INFANTS CONTRASTED. 469 
 
 which we have borne, shall be reproduced, furnished, however, with 
 different properties ; so, in regeneration, the same natural substance of 
 our body remains, the properties only being changed. Regeneration 
 does not destroy nature, but perfects and directs it ; it does not change 
 it so that it ceases to be nature. The antithesis is (a) that of the Fa- 
 natics, who assert that by regeneration the substance of the former body 
 is destroyed, and, the same soul remaining, a new body is given differ- 
 ing essentially from the former; (b) that of the Flacians, who assert 
 that God, in regeneration and conversion, so creates a new heart and a 
 new man, that the substance and essence of the old Adam, and particu- 
 larly the rational soul, is entirely destroyed, and a new essence of soul 
 is created from nothing." 
 
 [5] Quen. (Ill, 485): " ' A new man' and « new creature,' 2 Cor. 5 : 
 17 ; Gal. 6 : 15, on account of the new spiritual strength imparted in re- 
 generation and renovation, by which the image of God is repaired, con- 
 sisting in the knowledge of God, Col. 3 : 10, in righteousness and true 
 holiness, Eph. 4: 24." Expressions of similar import are, quickening, 
 Eph. 2:5; raising again, Eph. 2 : 6. But it is to be noticed particu- 
 larly that all these expressions are used only figuratively, to which 
 fact special attention is called in opposition to the Mystics. Thus, by 
 Holl. (890): "Literally speaking, neither Christ is born in us, nor is 
 there a new man in us, nor by the gift of regeneration is there flesh pro- 
 duced of our flesh." 
 
 [6] Holl. (885): "The regeneration of infants is instantaneous, but 
 the ordinary regeneration of adults is successive. In infants there is not 
 an earnest and obstinate resistance, the grace of the Holy Spirit accom- 
 panying baptism breaks and restrains their natural resistance that it 
 may not impede regeneration ; wherefore, their regeneration takes place 
 instantaneously. In the regeneration of adults there are many difficul- 
 ties to be removed by care, and illumination and instruction extended 
 over a long time are to be afforded from the divine Word, until a full 
 faith is enkindled in the mind." 
 
 Quen. (Ill, 483): "Regeneration is successive, not always instan- 
 taneous, but gradual and increasing; and although the quickening takes 
 place in the moment in which faith is produced in us, and Christ, the 
 true sun of righteousness, arises in our hearts, yet the spiritual life dis- 
 plays itself in successive acts." Br. (530): *'Noris there any con- 
 tradiction to this in the name regeneration, whose force and signification 
 are to be estimated from the analogy of generation, which takes place, 
 indeed, in an instant, for that comparison must not be extended too far. 
 . . . Those who say that regeneration is instantaneous, seem to under- 
 
470 APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION. 
 
 stand by it either justification or the conferring of the beginning of faith 
 as to the first holy thought and pious desire." 
 
 [7] Holl. (885): "Regeneration is the action of the Holy Spirit, 
 efficacious and sufficient to produce faith, but it is not irresistible 
 (Acts 18 : 5, 6)." Quen. (Ill, 483): " The regenerating grace of God 
 is always efficacious in itself, although it does not always proceed to the 
 second act, on account of the resistance of the subject to be regenerated. 
 Its efficacy is limited and mediated, exerting itself through the mediation 
 of the Word and Sacraments ; not physical, such as exists in medicine, 
 but hyperphysical, illustrated, however, in the Scriptures by physical 
 actions, illumination, generation, the sowing of seed, irrigation," etc. 
 
 [8] Quen. (Ill, 483): " Regeneration on the part of God regenera- 
 ting is perfect, and so does not admit of a greater and less any more than 
 carnal generation; on the part of men receiving, it is imperfect (because 
 sinners imperfectly receive the influence of the Holy Spirit), because 
 moral evil is always near them, Rom. 7 : 23 ; because sin still dwells in 
 them, verses 17, 18; and because faith can grow and increase in them." 
 
 [9] Holl. (886): " The grace of regeneration is lost when sins are 
 committed deliberately, and are subversive of conscience (1 Tim. 1 : 
 19). But regeneration lost may be recovered 'by the. penitent (Gal. 4: 
 19). Men regenerate, aided by the preserving grace of God, should be 
 carefully on their guard, lest, by the repetition of sin, they maliciously 
 do injury to conscience ; but if, nevertheless, they are overcome by the 
 machinations of the devil, the enticements of the world, and the sugges- 
 tions of the flesh, and fall three or four times, or oftener, into mortal 
 sin, they need not at all doubt of the converting and regenerating grace 
 of God. (Examples in Ex. 4: 24; 32; Numb. 20: 12; 12: 1, 2; 2 
 Sam. 11 : 4, 15 ; 24 : 1 ; comp. 1 Chron. 21 : 8.)" 
 
 [10] Quen. (Ill, 500): " Conversion is the action of the applying 
 grace of the Holy Spirit, whereby, together with the Father and Son, 
 of absolutely pure grace, founded in the merit of Christ, through the 
 preaching of the Word, he transfers the adult spiritually dead from his 
 state of sin to a state of faith, successively as to the preparatory acts, 
 but in an instant as to the ultimate act, by a divine and supernatural 
 but resistible power, so that, repenting, he may obtain by faith the re- 
 mission of his sins, and partake of eternal salvation." Conversion may 
 here be considered in a broader or narrower sense. 
 
 Quen. (Ill, 489): " Conversion is used either in a wide sense, not 
 only as it embraces transfer from a state of sin to one of faith, but like- 
 wise justification and renovation, and likewise its continuation in its en- 
 tire extent, Acts 26: 20." Thus the Form. Conc. (Sol. Dec, II, 70) : 
 
CONVERSION A DIVINE ACT. 471 
 
 " This is most certain, that in true conversion a change, renovation, and 
 movement ought to take place in the intellect, in the will and heart of 
 man, that the mind of man may clearly recognize his sins, may fear the 
 anger of God, may turn himself from sin, may recognize and appro- 
 priate the promise of grace in Christ, may be occupied with devout 
 thoughts, may form good purposes, and may display diligence in moral 
 improvement, and strive against the flesh ;" to this, however, Holl. 
 remarks (854): " Many divines abstain from this more extended sense 
 of conversion, since from it error and confusion may easily enter into 
 incautious minds, for in this way distinct acts of grace are united under 
 one term ; or, in a narrow sense, as distinguished from justification and 
 renovation, and this is its usage in this place." 
 
 Holl. (854) distinguishes still further: " Conversion taken in a spe- 
 cial sense, the act of grace by which the Holy Spirit excites in the sinner 
 sincere grief for his sins by the word of the Law, and enkindles true 
 faith in Christ by the word of the Gospel, that he may obtain remission 
 of sins and eternal salvation." And (in accordance with what was said 
 under the head of Regeneration, note 1), " Conversion in the most spe- 
 cial sense ; the act of grace by which the Holy Spirit restrains, subdues, 
 and breaks the will and heart of the sinner in the midst of his sins, that 
 he may detest his sins with grief of mind and thus be prepared for re- 
 ceiving faith in Christ." 
 
 [11] Br. (533): "The word conversion is taken in a double sense 
 in the Scriptures, inasmuch as at one time God is said to convert man, 
 and at another man is said to convert himself, although as to the thing 
 itself the action is one and the same." The first is called " transitive 
 conversion, because it does not terminate in God who is the agent, but 
 passes from him to another subject, to wit, to the sinner," and is distin- 
 guished as " active, so far as it proceeds from God, and as passive, so 
 far as it is received by man, Jer. 31 : 18." Holl. (853). The other is 
 called intransitive conversion. Br. (534): "Although the acts by which 
 the sinner is said to convert himself depend for their efficacy upon the 
 Holy Spirit, yet because they are the acts of the intellect and will, and 
 do not pass from the potencies whose acts they are into another subject, 
 but are terminated in the potencies themselves, in this respect they are 
 classified with immanent or intransitive acts." Holl. (854): " Con- 
 version (intransitive) is the goal and effect of transitive conversion, and 
 is the penitence by which the sinner is said to convert himself by means 
 of the strength imparted by converting grace, and passively received. 
 In regard to intransitive conversion, Acts 3: 19. For which reason the 
 sinner, repenting, converts himself not by his native, but by imparted 
 
472 APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION. 
 
 powers." Holl. remarks, finally (853): "As we are here employed in 
 unfolding the acts of divine grace applying salvation, it easily appears 
 that we are not designedly taking into consideration the intransitive 
 conversion, or the repentance of the sinner." 
 
 [12] Holl. (868): "The starting-point is sin, both actual sins, so 
 far as, after they are committed, they remain morally as if ratified or 
 not retracted ; and habitual, so far as they not only imply the want of 
 that habitual perfection which ought to exist, but likewise the propen- 
 sity to all the evils which are the fountain and cause of actual sins." 
 Br. (539) : "That actual sins maybe abolished by conversion it is nec- 
 essary first, that they should be retracted by the sinner, and that they 
 be recognized by the intellect, not only with the speculative judgment 
 that they are truly sins, but likewise with the practical, that efforts are 
 to be made for the abolition of sins, and circumspection employed in re- 
 gard to the mode and means by which they may be abolished; on the 
 side of the will, efficacious dissatisfaction with sins, or a detestation of 
 them united with grief, is required." (543) : " Conversion tends to 
 abolish habitual sins by the same acts by which it tends to abolish actual 
 sins ; yet so, that they should be abolished or expelled not only morally, 
 but physically* and really ; if not thoroughly, yet relatively and as to 
 their dominion." 
 
 Quen. (Ill, 492) more exactly: "The starting-point in general is 
 the state of sin, Eph. 2:1, seq., and indeed viewed not in its totality, 
 as it includes also the guilt and dominion of sin, but taken partially, in 
 so far as it expresses a deficiency of strength to return to God by re- 
 pentance, united with obstinate depravity." Grh. (VI, 252) : " Con- 
 trition embraces (1) the true knowledge of sin; (2) the sense of the 
 divine anger against sins ; (3) anguish and fear of conscience ; (4) true 
 humiliation before God ; (5) frank confession of sin ; (6) the serious 
 hatred and detestation of sin. It is, however, to be observed in this 
 place: (1) although true contrition is required in all true and saving 
 repentance, yet there are grades of contrition, as the terrors and anguish 
 are not equal in all, but in some they are greater and in others less ; (2) 
 the promise of the remission of sins does not depend upon the dignity 
 and quantity of our contrition, but alone upon the merit of Christ. . . 
 (3) the knowledge of sin never becomes so perfect that it embraces spe- 
 cifically the knowledge of all sins." 
 
 [13] Br. (541) : " It is necessary, moreover, that the mind should 
 aim at the abolition of actual sins, both with respect to the offence 
 
 * [Br. explains physically : " So far as conditions of absence or habits are ex- 
 pelled from their subjects."] 
 
BEPENTANCE CONSISTS OF CONTRITION AND FAITH. 473 
 
 against God and the obligation of sinners to make satisfaction to God, 
 which indeed can be effected solely by faith in Christ, the Mediator, 
 and in his merit and satisfaction for our sins ; and, when faith lays hold 
 of this, the mind turns to God, who, although offended with our sins, 
 yet embraces us in his love and grace, and is now fully reconciled by 
 the satisfaction of Christ. The end to be accomplished is faith in Christ, 
 by which the sinner is reconciled to God, who is offended by his sins." 
 Holl. (869) : "The proximate end is contrition ; the remote, faith in 
 Christ." In addition, the observation (871) : " Contrition is not the 
 positive or causal means of enkindling faith, but is only the privative 
 means, by which the incapacity of the subject and the obstacles which 
 otherwise would impede the enkindling of faith are removed. There- 
 fore faith in Christ is the remote end of conversion, because the Holy 
 Spirit, producing contrition by the Law, proposes to prepare the heart 
 for the excitation in it of saving faith by the Gospel. When I call it 
 remote, I do not wish that anyone should suppose that faith is to be far 
 removed or separated from contrition, for contrition in the discourses ot 
 Christ is united with faith by the closest tie, (Mark 1 : 15 ; Acts 2 : 
 38 ; 2 Cor. 7 : 10) ; but thereby it is only indicated that the light of 
 faith arises not through conversion by means of the Law, but from 
 another quarter, through regeneration by means of the Gospel. (1 Pet. 
 1 : 23 ; James 1 : 18.)" 
 
 [14] Ap. Conf. (V, 28) : " We maintain that repentance consists of 
 two parts, viz., contrition and faith." Grh. (VI, 234) : " The number 
 of leading divisions of the heavenly doctrine, by the ministry of which 
 the Holy Spirit proclaims true and saving repentance and produces it in 
 the hearts of men, is the same with the essential parts of repentance. 
 There are now two general classes of heavenly doctrine by which the 
 Holy Spirit preaches and produces repentance, viz., the Law and the 
 Gospel. Therefore there are two essential parts of repentance. The 
 connection of the major premise is plain, because each of these two doc- 
 trines produces its peculiar and proper effect in converting man ; these 
 two effects, although different from each other, nevertheless, concur 
 harmoniously to the production of the one common end of repentance. 
 The Law produces pain, by manifesting the atrocity of sin and the 
 anger of God against it, and accusing man on account of his transgres- 
 sion. The Gospel offers to terrified and contrite man Christ, the Med- 
 iator, who died on the altar of the cross for our sins." 
 
 The Ap. Conf. adds further (V, 28) : " If any one desire to add a 
 third (part) namely, fruits worthy of repentance, that is, a change of 
 the whole life and conduct for the better, we will not oppose;" and 
 31 
 
474 APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION. 
 
 Mel. (Loc. c. Th., II, 4): "The parts are contrition and faith; new 
 obedience ought necessarily then to follow ; if any one desire to call this 
 a third part, I have no objection." From the times of Grh. (VI, 245) 
 it was more explicitly stated: "That, properly and accurately speaking, 
 good works do not constitute a part of repentance." Holl. (1147) : 
 " New obedience is not a part but an effect of repentance." But (1148) : 
 " New obedience inseparably follows repentance, and cannot be severed 
 from it even in the case of the dying." With reference to the Roman 
 Catholic distinction between contrition and attrition, the Ap. Conf. (V, 
 29) says: "From contrition we exclude those idle and endless disputes, 
 about as to when we grieve over our sins from love to God and when 
 from fear of punishment." 
 
 The later divines discuss more particularly the two parts of conver- 
 sion, contrition and faith, under the head of penitence as intransitive 
 conversion, which generally follows the doctrine of the Sacraments. As 
 the contents are similar and the difference only this, that transitive con- 
 version is considered the operation of God, repentance, that is, intransi- 
 tive conversion, as the movement inwardly taking place in man as the 
 consequence of this operation, we therefore unite both articles into one; 
 as, likewise, the Symbolical Books and the earlier divines treat of this 
 subject only as one topic, viz., under the head of repentance. Contri- 
 tion is defined by the later divines as " the first act of repentance by 
 which the sinner, struck by the lightning of the law, aroused by the 
 sense of divine anger on account of the sins that he has committed, is 
 sorry after a godly sort, is thoroughly alarmed, and earnestly detests his 
 sins. Ps. 51: 4; Jer. 3 : 13 ; Ps. 6 : 1 ; 38: 1, 3, 4, 6." Faith, as 
 "the second penitential act, by which the sinner, rendered contrite. by 
 the wounds of his conscience, seeks a remedy from the wounds of Jesus 
 Christ, exhibited in the Gospel, confidently appropriating them to him- 
 self as an individual (Quen., Ill, 581).". As " the requisites of true 
 contrition" are cited (Hole. 1152) " antecedently, the knowledge of 
 sin, not only theoretical but likewise practical. Formally, an efficacious 
 displeasure or hatred of sin, united with serious grief, constitutes it." 
 The "marks of true contrition" are (1155), " 1, internal: (a) the re- 
 nunciation of the evil purpose and the omission of the intended sin ; 
 (&) a legal and pedagogic desire for a most approved physician or a 
 most beneficent and powerful deliverer, Acts 2 : 37 ; 2, external (prob- 
 able, but not infallible), which are discovered in the mouth of the 
 sinner (the confession of sin of the entire Church, which takes place 
 ordinarily in public prayers, and also extraordinarily in public calam- 
 ities), or of a private person who confesses his sins before God (Ps. 51 : 
 
PRIVATE CONFESSION. 475 
 
 5, called by Luther the confession of faith), before the Church (Josh. 
 7 : 19), formerly called etjofioAd-yr/aig, before a minister of the Church 
 (Matt. 3 : 6), before a neighbor (James 5:16, the confession of love) ; 
 in the face and external appearance (tears, sackcloth, the sprinkling of 
 ashes, smiting of the breast and thigh, rending of garments, lying 
 upon the earth) ; in outward works (fasting and satisfaction, which is 
 rendered to our injured neighbor or to the Church offended by a public 
 scandal)." Concerning Confession it is said : " The private confession 
 of sins before a priest to obtain forgiveness has no sure divine warrant, 
 neither is the enumeration of all and each of the transgressions, with 
 the circumstances modifying or aggravating them, and the communica- 
 tion of them to the ears of a priest, necessary or possible (Quen., Ill, 
 601)." In regard to satisfaction, however, which the Catholics define 
 as prayer, fasting, and alms, and of which they say that they are a pay- 
 ment of punishment still to a large extent due, although the guilt has 
 already been pardoned, this is applicable: "After remission of sin 
 no punishment, strictly speaking, pertains to the converted and justified, 
 but sometimes there remains a paternal chastisement and remedial afflic- 
 tion." Upon both comp. Ap. Conf., Art. VI, concerning Confession 
 and Satisfaction. 
 
 [ The term " auricular ," as applied to confession, is used in two 
 senses. As a confession made orally, and received by the ear of the con- 
 fessor, it is applicable to Lutheran confession. But as the term is ordi- 
 nally used for the compulsory enumeration of details by the Romish 
 Church, our Lutheran theologians most emphatically repudiate it. "It 
 would, manifestly, be a logomachy, were it to be asserted that the kind 
 of confession here understood, is not auricular. In the conferences at 
 Augsburg in 1530, an agreement had so far been reached, that the con- 
 troversy on this point might have been regarded as ended (See Coeles- 
 tine's History, § III, p. 55). But it is well known that the Council of 
 Trent silently receded from the concessions previously made by the 
 Catholic theologians, prescribed the necessity of the confession of all 
 sins (even of thoughts), and declared it godless to deny the possibility of 
 the complete confession of all sins, or to name it spiritual tyranny. It 
 is clear that, in this sense, the Lutherans could not admit of auricular 
 confession. They allowed, indeed, a confession of sins entering into de- 
 tails, and gave this the preference above a merely general or summary 
 confession ; yet for this they applied no constraint, but left it to the con- 
 science of every one, whether he should confess individual sins to his 
 pastor, or be satisfied with the general declaration that he was a sinner, 
 and desired forgiveness." See "Apology," ut supra, Augusti's Ghrist- 
 liche ArchcBologie, III, 93 sq.] 
 
476 APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION. 
 
 [15] Chmn. (Loc. Th., I, 199) ; Conversion or renovation is not a 
 change that is accomplished and perfected always in a single moment in 
 all its parts, but it has its beginnings and its advances, through which, 
 in great weakness, it is perfected. It is not, therefore, to be under- 
 stood that I am to wait, with a secure and indolent will, until renova- 
 tion or conversion have been accomplished, according to the stages 
 already described, by the influence of the Holy Spirit, or without any 
 movement on my part. Nor can it be shown with mathematical ac- 
 curacy where the liberated will begins to act." 
 
 [16] Br. (563): "That divine operation, by which conversion is 
 produced in man by the Law and the Gospel, is usually called grace." 
 This one and the same grace is usually distinguished as prevenient, 
 operating, and co-operating, though even here the distinctions are not 
 always uniform. Br. (563): " By prevenient grace is understood the 
 divine inspiration of the first holy thought and godly desire. This 
 grace is called prevenient, because it is prior to our deliberate consent, 
 or because in this way the will of the person to be converted is antici- 
 pated. Operating grace is that which directly follows the commence- 
 ment of conversion and has reference to its continuance ; by which it 
 comes to pass that man by an effort, although weak, inclines to Christ, 
 the Mediator, and the promises of gratuitous pardon for Chrift's sake, 
 and resists doubts. According to others, indeed, operating grace is re- 
 ferred to the commencement of conversion, and coincides with preven- 
 ient and exciting grace as to the effect, and is called operating because 
 without us and without our free consent it operates in us. Co-operating 
 grace is that operation which aids and strengthens or corroborates the 
 intellect already in some measure assenting to the divine promises, and 
 the will trusting in Christ, and so operates with the will which concurs 
 by the powers, yet weak, before received. By others, again, the co- 
 operating grace of God is described as that by which God concurs with 
 man already converted, in preserving the powers conferred upon him, 
 increasing them, and assisting so that his faith may not fail" (in which 
 case co-operating grace is more applicable to sanctification). Quen. 
 (Ill, 494) and others divide into u assisting grace, which acts exterior 
 to man, and indwelling grace, which enters the heart of man and, chang- 
 ing it spiritually, inhabits it." To the former belong "incipient or 
 prevenient grace, exciting grace, operating grace, and perfecting grace," 
 of which the first three operate as preparatory acts, but by the latter 
 the act of real conversion is accomplished ; inhabiting grace occurs only 
 after conversion, in sanctification. " The grace of God acts before con- 
 version, in it, and after it. The first is called prevenient, preparative, 
 
MAN IS PASSIVE IN THE BEGINNING OF CONVERSION. 477 
 
 and exciting ; the second, operating and completing, in the first sense ; 
 the last, co-operating, assisting, and completing, in the second sense. 
 But grace, effecting and completing conversion by means of the Word, 
 produces (1) the knowledge of sin, which is the first stage of conver- 
 sion; (2) compunction of heart, that there may be detestation of sins 
 committed and grief on their account ; (3) the act of faith itself and 
 confidence in Christ, viz., belief in Christ and the embracing of his 
 merit by true faith ; which act of faith is immediately followed by a 
 transfer from a state of wrath to one of grace, which is the final act of 
 conversion, and takes place instantaneously, as it cannot be that a man 
 should be in a state of wrath and of grace, under death and in life, at 
 the same time (497)." 
 
 [17] Br. (564) : " It is properly said that man is merely passive in 
 the commencement of conversion." Quex. (Ill, 508) presents the 
 thought more fully thus : " Conversion is taken either in a wide sense, 
 so that it includes also the preparatory acts, and thus man is passive in 
 reference to each act or degree ; or in a narrow sense, for the transfer 
 from a state of wrath to one of grace, which is instantaneous by means 
 of the gift of saving faith, and undoubtedly God alone works here, man 
 being subjected to this divine action as a passive object." This state- 
 ment naturally flows from the doctrine of the state of corruption (com- 
 pare § 28, Note 8, seq., and Form. Coxa, Sol Dec, II, 7), and thus 
 an answer is furnished to the question, " In what way does the will of 
 man act in his conversion ?" 
 
 Hutt., who very thoroughly discusses this question in his Loc. Com., 
 makes this preliminary remark (p. 281) : " Occasion for this question 
 is given by the fact that, in the conversion of an unregenerate man, the 
 change cannot take place unless good actions concur and spiritual exer- 
 cises intervene, such as struggling with the flesh, contending with 
 unbelief, assent to the divine Word, and such like. It has been there- 
 fore asked, and is to-day asked, whether these exercises, or even any 
 part of them, can be attributed to the power of human ability? But 
 that this question may be rightly answered, it must first be observed, in 
 general, that the conversion of man to God is not always one and the 
 same thing, but that it may be of two distinct kinds, according to the 
 two distinct subjects who are converted. Some of those who are to be 
 converted are altogether beyond the limits of the Church, commonly 
 known as infidels, and such are all they who live without any connec- 
 tion with the Church ; others, however, live in the midst of the as- 
 sembly of the called, and were brought into connection with the Church 
 by Baptism, and were at one time regenerate, but afterwards fell from 
 
478 APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION. 
 
 the grace of regeneration through sins committed against their con- 
 science ; and hence it happens that the conversion of unregenerate un- 
 believers is one thing, and the conversion of those once regenerated, 
 but now fallen, is another. And there is a great difference between 
 these two kinds of conversion ; inasmuch as he who has hitherto been 
 standing in the covenant of divine grace, or, it may be, has yielded to 
 the temptation of the devil, and has fallen from the grace of God, yet 
 in some measure has received and possessed the first-fruits of the Holy 
 Spirit, very widely differs from him who for the first time is called and 
 admitted to faith in Christ and the grace of the covenant. The latter 
 are changed from unregenerate to regenerate, from unbelievers to be- 
 lievers. But the condition of the lapsed in the Church is such that, 
 although seduced by the devil, they have become subject to divine wrath 
 and eternal damnation ; nevertheless they have not yet altogether fallen 
 from the covenant itself and from the right of adoption of the sons of 
 God, so far as God is concerned, nor do they absolutely fall away from 
 that, unless they persevere to the end in sin. Their conversion, then, 
 t is nothing else than a return to the use or complete fruition of pristine 
 grace, and this by serious repentance. Beside these two forms of con- 
 version there is mention made, in the schools of the divines, of a third 
 kind also, which is called the repentance or conversion of the standing, 
 i. e., of those who are regenerate, but who, on account of the adhering 
 infirmities and failings of sin and the flesh, are from time to time, as it 
 were, revived through repentance ; so that their conversion is nothing 
 else than a perpetual mortification of the flesh and a daily struggle be- 
 tween the flesh and the Spirit. . . . And concerning the two last-men- 
 tioned kinds, namely, the conversion of the lapsed and of the standing, 
 there is here no controversy or discussion whatever. . . . The only 
 question here in dispute is, What can an unbelieving man, hitherto unre- 
 generate, do, by his own strength, in his original conversion? To which 
 we reply, that man can do absolutely nothing, not even the very least thing, 
 towards beginning or effecting his conversion; and that the beginning, the 
 progress, and, in short, the whole development of his conversion, is to be 
 ascribed altogether and alone to the operation of the Holy Spirit." . . . 
 Then he continues: " Various difficulties and many questions arise in 
 regard to this purer doctrine of our churches; and, unless these be 
 clearly explained, a very abundant harvest of manifold and very grave 
 errors may arise." 
 
 " For it is asked (1) whether, since the fall, all the powers have been so 
 broken, or rather extinguished, in spiritual matters, that not the least capa- 
 bility (luavdr?]?), aptitude, or capacity has remained! In regard to this 
 
THE WILL IN CONVERSION. 479 
 
 question a very sharp controversy arose among certain divines, some 
 interdicting the words 'aptitude' and 'capacity' in this connection, and 
 others admitting them ; neither party, perhaps, being very dexterous in 
 their explanation. For this strife is easily settled if we will only reflect 
 that these terms can be taken in a double sense, viz., an active and a 
 passive. An active sense, if by aptitude and capacity you understand 
 such an efficient (kvepyrrrud)) faculty, by which man can apprehend the 
 grace of conversion offered in the preached Word. Passive, on the 
 other hand, if man be described as a susceptible (nad-qTiubs') subject, that 
 is able to receive conversion, or fitted for conversion, which passive ca- 
 pacity or aptitude cannot be predicated of a block or a stone. And in 
 this latter sense our sainted Luther ascribes capacity to man, i. e., as 
 having susceptible capacity (dvvafug 7ra#?™c#). . . . As to this passive 
 capacity, however, there is here no controversy, but only concerning the 
 active capacity, which we so totally deny to unregenerate man, that we 
 do not assign to it even that trifling amount which some are pleased to 
 suggest. But it is inquired (2) since the will of unregenerate man can 
 do nothing, not even the very least towards his conversion, what is his 
 attitude, then, in conversion ? This question is answered differently by 
 different persons, (a) Some assert that he is merely and purely pas- 
 sive ; thus Luther was not horrified at this phrase, for he wrote (Comm. 
 on Psalms): " It is an error that the free will has any activity in a good 
 work, when we speak of an internal work ; for to wish, to believe, to 
 hope, to love, are movements, drawings, and leadings of the divine 
 Word, and a continued purifying and renovation of the mind, and 
 though this passion be not always equally intense, yet it is always a 
 passion [a being wrought upon].' . . . (5) There are others who an- 
 swer this question, that man in conversion is like a block. This opin- 
 ion seems very harsh and horrid to many, especially to the patrons of 
 Synergism. But this way of speaking, properly understood, has no in- 
 convenience whatever. For, although there is a great difference be- 
 tween a man and a block, both as to the faculty by which he acts in 
 choosing among things external and subject to reason, and in this respect 
 that conversion cannot take place with a block or a stone as it can with 
 man, however corrupt ; yet, nevertheless, if that dvva/ug, power, or 
 faculty be considered, by which conversion can be begun and completed, 
 there certainly is in this respect no difference whatever between man 
 and a block, for he can do nothing more by his own powers towards 
 his conversion than a block, but is as clay in the hands of the potter. 
 . . . Why? Because in this respect the condition of a block is 
 even better than that of man ; for, as it lacks the power of willing, so 
 
480 APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION. 
 
 * 
 
 it is also destitute of sin and wickedness, which cling to the unregener- 
 ate man.'" . . . But even the very fact that man in conversion is only 
 purely passive, is of itself a work of grace, for naturally man resists it. 
 Cal. (X, 15): " Unregenerate man has, indeed, a passive power, and 
 so a certain Itcavdr^^ which you should, however, more correctly call a 
 power of non-resistance, or an obediential power, with respect to his 
 conversion ; nevertheless, the Holy Spirit must produce even this non- 
 resistance in us, since the nature of man, on account of congenital depraved 
 concupiscence, is in itself hostile to the Holy Spirit, and is not able to re- 
 frain from resisting. ' ' 
 
 Here the question, however, arises : How then can conversion be ef- 
 fected in man otherwise than against his will or without his knowledge? 
 Both these inferences are rejected. Hutt. (Loc. Com., 284): " There 
 have been those who asserted that the will of unregenerate man in con- 
 version is in a hostile attitude, so that the Holy Spirit effects conversion 
 by violent drawings or by a kind of force in those who are unwilling 
 and resisting. This opinion has elements both of truth and falsehood in 
 it. For it is true that the natural man can do nothing of himself but 
 resist the Holy Spirit. . . . Thus it is also true, that some have been 
 converted when they were violently raging against God. But what is 
 hence inferred is most false, viz., that they were converted while repug- 
 nant and reluctant. For it is most certain that they, in whom this 
 resistance does not cease, never are converted to God. . . . Others 
 answer, that man in conversion not only does nothing, but is converted 
 while unconcerned and not knowing what is being done with him. This 
 opinion manifestly savors of enthusiasm. . . . For, although unregen- 
 erate man cannot know of himself and of his own powers what is being 
 done with him, yet the Holy Spirit removes this stupor and illuminates 
 his mind, so that now he knows what is being done with him and yields 
 his consent to the Holy Spirit." The Word of God is designated as the 
 means which God employs for conversion, and to the unregenerate noth- 
 ing more is ascribed than the power to hear or to read this Word of 
 God. Form. Conc. (Sol. Dec, II, 53): "This Word of God man, 
 while yet unregenerate, can hear with his outward ears or read. . . . 
 Through this means or instrument, namely, the preaching and hearing 
 of his Word, God operates, softens our hearts, and draws man, so that 
 through the preaching of the Law he recognizes both his sins and the 
 wrath of God, and experiences true terrors and contrition in his heart. 
 And through the annunciation of, and meditation upon the Gospel . . . 
 the little spark of faith is enkindled in his heart . . . and in this way 
 the Holy Spirit, who does all these things, is sent into the heart." 
 
THE DIVINE WORD THE INSTRUMENT OF CONVERSION. 481 
 
 Hutt. (Loc. Com., 285): "In every conversion the "Word of God must 
 intervene as the organ, or, as the Fathers said, as the vehicle {bxvH-o.) of 
 the Holy Spirit. Not that new emotions are impressed upon those who 
 are to be converted, as a seal upon wax ; nor is this conversion something 
 irrational, as when Balaam's ass spoke, Numb. 22 : 28 ; nor is it any- 
 thing violent, as when a stone is hurled ; nor is it anything enthusiasti- 
 cal, as where the professedly inspired (who are led astray by the devil) 
 utter oracles ; or when many things take place with the possessed, with- 
 out the application of the mind and will. But the beginning of every 
 conversion is made through the ministry of the Word ; to this men must 
 give place, and they must admit the Word that is heard, if any conver- 
 sion at all is to occur. Now, although, indeed, man, not yet regenerate, 
 can hear and read the Word of God, can discuss it at length, can re- 
 ceive through it a kind of historical faith, not less than the devils them- 
 selves, as James testifies, 2: 19; yet he cannot in any way embrace 
 or understand the word of salvation, since it is foolishness unto him, 
 unless the illumination of the Holy Spirit be added ; so far is he from 
 being able in any way to accomplish the matter of his salvation of his 
 own accord, or even to make a beginning of it. But, as the ancients 
 said, those efforts are fruitless if they be not aided by grace ; yea, they 
 are absolutely of no account, unless they be excited ; but the Holy Spirit 
 excites good emotions when by his grace he inspires godly thoughts and 
 anticipates man by instilling the emotion of a good purpose. Hence, 
 the beginning and the whole operation of conversion is altogether and 
 entirely to be ascribed to the Holy Spirit alone, who, in man that hears 
 the Word, is not idle, but moves and impels the will, so that from the 
 very beginning of conversion it fluctuates and inclines and begins to 
 struggle with the flesh, until from being hostile it yields assent, i. e., 
 from being enslaved it becomes free ; from being unwilling, it becomes 
 willing ; so that now to will is present with man, and he delights in the 
 law of the Lord, not by constraint or unwillingly, but willingly (Kara to 
 ekovglov), Rom. 7 : 18, 22 ; Philem. v. 14." By these statements we still 
 do not, indeed, ascertain clearly enough, if conversion be effected in any 
 person, how this can happen otherwise than without his will ; so that 
 herein there seems to lie an excuse for him Avho is not converted. 'And 
 yet we are warranted so to interpret what has already been cited, that, 
 according to the conception of these theologians, the Word of God, 
 even where it is heard only outwardly, begets, through a gracious in- 
 fluence, no doubt irresistible, not indeed at once conversion itself, but 
 still that freedom of the will which makes it possible for the individual 
 not only to resist grace, as he heretofore always did, but now also to let 
 
482 APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION. 
 
 it operate in him. Thus God still remains the sole, efficient cause of 
 conversion ; this proceeds, however, thenceforth, no longer against and 
 without the will of man. Thus, at least, the later theologians express 
 themselves. They assume a prevenient grace, which produces unavoid- 
 able good emotions in man. Quen. (Ill, 513): " We grant that man, 
 aroused at first by prevenient grace, is so affected by the preaching of 
 the Word, that he cannot escape the presence of God, and receives an 
 inward impulse ; nevertheless it does not follow hence, nor is it true, if 
 the first movement of prevenient grace be unavoidable, that, therefore, its 
 issue, viz., conversion itself, is unavoidable, and that we are irresistibly 
 converted. For, though man cannot prevent this first movement from 
 taking place, he still has the liberty of resisting, in this first movement 
 itself, and so he has also in the second and third (though not indiffer- 
 ently, i. e., equally, to be converted and not to be converted ; for the 
 ability of a man already influenced by prevenient grace inclines rather 
 to the latter than to the former), and he can, through a stubborn will, 
 impede prevenient grace, repel it, and by resisting it prevent his own 
 conversion." [Chmn. Loci Theol., 186 : " For Saul had the Word of 
 God, and the good Spirit of God led him. But since he interposed a 
 contrary act of his will, the Holy Spirit departed from him, 1 Sam. 16 : 
 14. So Matt. 23 : 37."] 
 
 And Holl. (873): "When man lies dead in sins, lives along 
 securely, never thinking about his conversion, God, most merciful, 
 comes to him anticipatingly, and by means of the Word either heard or 
 read, or retained in his mind, thereupon excites good emotions in his 
 mind which the divines call unavoidable, because he cannot evade their 
 presence and perception ; which also, in a certain way, can be called 
 irresistible, as to their origin and their perception, because the sinner is 
 in no way able to oppose himself to the excitation of them by the Word, 
 or to his own perception of them, but can only withhold his acquies- 
 cence in them. 'The first emotions,' says J. Musaeus, * can be called 
 irresistible, so far as they precede our thinking, so that it is not in our 
 power to prevent them from arising ; although, after they have arisen, 
 they can be resisted, so as not to take root, and they can be hindered or 
 altogether suffocated.' " 
 
 [18] Form. Conc. (Sol. Dec, II, 65) : " It follows, as soon as the 
 Holy Spirit, through the Word and Sacraments, has begun his work of 
 regeneration and renovation in us, that we then can and should truly 
 co-operate through the power of the Holy Spirit, although much infirm- 
 ity is joined therewith. But this fact, that we co-operate, does not 
 arise from our carnal and natural powers, but from those new powers 
 
IN HOW FAR IS PREVENIENT GRACE IRRESISTIBLE? 483 
 
 and gifts which the Holy Spirit begins in us in conversion." Chmn. 
 (Loc. TheoL, I, 199) : " Xo one can show the mathematical point, in 
 which the liberated will begins to act. When prevenient grace, i. e., 
 the first beginnings of faith and conversion are given to man, at once 
 there begins the struggle of the flesh and the Spirit, and it is manifest 
 that this struo-crle cannot occur without the movement of our will. For 
 the Holy Spirit struggled in Moses while yet living, far otherwise 
 against his flesh, than Michael contended with the devil for the dead 
 body of Moses. Thus at first the desire is very obscure, the assent very 
 languid, the obedience very feeble ; and these gifts should increase. 
 They increase in us, however, not as a block of wood is carried along 
 by a violent impulse, or as the lilies grow without having to labor or 
 care ; but by effort, struggling, seeking, praying, knocking ; and this 
 not of ourselves, it is the gift of God, Luke 19 : 13 ; Matt. 25 : 26 ; 2 
 Tim. 1 : 6. This is, then, the import of what has been taught concern- 
 ing prevenient, preparatory, and operating grace, that not our part is the 
 first in conversion, but that God anticipates us with the Word and the 
 divine afflatus, moving and impelling the will. But, after this emotion 
 of the will, divinely occasioned, the human will is not purely passive, 
 but, moved and assisted by the Holy Spirit, does not resist, but assents, 
 and becomes a co-worker (avvepyog) with God." [Chmn. continues: 
 11 Augustine has presented an excellent example in his own conversion, 
 in which we see a living answer to this question, how amidst the hidden 
 sparks and feeble beginnings of prevenient grace, the will is not inactive, 
 but the strife between the flesh and the Spirit begins. For questions of 
 this character should be decided from individual cases ; they are best 
 known, not from idle disputations, nor from the examples of others, but 
 from personal experience, as perceived in the serious exercises of our 
 o\vn v repentance. But as many live, without any exercise of faith or 
 prayer, they collect many inexplicable things." The passages from 
 Augustine cited are those of his " Confessions," that give the history of 
 his conversion. " I quote these words of Augustine, because from this 
 example the matter can be better understood than from many argu- 
 ments."] 
 
 [19] Quex. (Ill, 498): "The conversion of man is the action of 
 divine grace alone operating, and is accomplished by the same infinite 
 power by which God creates anything from nothing and raises from the 
 dead ; and it is, moreover, effected through the means of the Word, 
 which has that supernatural and divine power inherent in it, and which 
 it exerts in the conversion of man, Eph. 1 : 17, 19 ; Phil. 2:13; John 
 15 : 4, 5; Col. 1 : 12, 13 ; 2 : 12, 13." The question, '-Whether con- 
 
484 APPLICATION OF KEDEMPTION. 
 
 version, once begun in man by the power of the Holy Spirit, afterwards 
 is perfected and preserved by the powers of human nature alone ? " is 
 answered in the negative. Hutt. (Loc. Com., 286): "For, neither 
 by this operation of the Holy Spirit is corrupt nature so restored, as to 
 have it in its power to change itself for the better, or not any longer to 
 need the aid of the Holy Spirit, and be able to stand in grace by its 
 own power, and to persevere unto the end. But all these things, no 
 less than the beginning of conversion, are to be ascribed to the Holy 
 Spirit, who works in us not only to will, but also to do, and who con- 
 summates and perfects the good that he begins in us, and by his own 
 power guards and preserves the regenerate unto the end, Phil. 1 : 6 ; 2 : 
 13 ; 1 Pet. 1 : 5 ; 5 : 10." And the statement is firmly maintained that 
 the causes of our conversion are only two, Hutt. (Loc. Com., 284) : 
 "Again, the theologians differ widely in their views, some holding that 
 there are only two, viz., the Holy Spirit and the Word of God; and 
 others three, adding to those already mentioned also a third, namely, the 
 will of man ; which divergence has occasioned great commotions in the 
 Church of God. This strife, however, it seems could be readily con- 
 trolled and quieted, if we would accurately distinguish between the two 
 kinds of men who are to be converted, and so also of conversion it- 
 self. . . . For the question is either concerning the original conversion, 
 which is that of the ungodly or unbelievers and those never regenerated, 
 or concerning the second conversion, which is the daily repentance of 
 believers and of the regenerate. If the question be concerning original 
 conversion, surely neither more nor less causes of conversion can or 
 ought to be assigned than two, so that those w T ho here add a third, and 
 insist upon the will of man, are partakers of the synergistic error. . . . 
 Whence, if an unbelieving man who has never been regenerate is to be 
 converted, we assert that only two causes concur, but vastly differing in 
 kind; the one truly efficient, which is solely and alone the Holy Spirit; 
 the other the organic or instrumenral cause, which is the Word of God 
 preached and heard, as also the right use of the Sacraments." Cal. 
 (X, 16); " Our orthodox theory is stated in the Form. Conc, mainly 
 in opposition to the Synergists ; . . .to whom are to be added also Ph. 
 Melanchthon, as also, later, the Helmstadt divines ; . . . although 
 there is a difference between the old and new Synergists, that the latter 
 ascribe the beginning of conversion to the natural powers, and its progress 
 and completion to the supernatural grace of the Holy Spirit ; while the 
 former invert the matter, ascribing the beginning to the Holy Spirit, 
 and the completion to the natural powers" 
 
THE MYSTICAL UNION. 485 
 
 §47. (4.) The Mystical Union. 
 
 The Holy Scriptures assert that God dwells in the believer, 
 and express by this a peculiar union of God with him, which 
 Dogmatics distinguish as a mystical union. This takes place at 
 the instant in which man is justified and regenerated, and is in- 
 separably united with justification and regeneration, so that, as 
 we associate with justification the forgiveness of sins, and with 
 regeneration the power to believe, so in the mystical union we 
 describe the direct operation of both these acts of divine grace, 
 which consists in this, that God makes his abode in a peculiar 
 manner in the justified or regenerate. [1] By this mystical 
 union more is expressed than a mere agreement of the will of 
 man with the will of God, or a mere union of both in love, or a 
 mere influence and communication of spiritual gifts on the part 
 of the Holy Ghost. [2] The passages, John 14 : 23 ; 1 Cor. 6 : 15, 
 17 ; Eph. 5 : 30; 2 Pet. 1:4; Gal. 3 : 27 ; 2 : 19, 20, prove, more- 
 over, that this union is not merely figurative, but literal and ac- 
 tual, so that it cannot be described otherwise than as the union 
 of the substance of God with the substance of man, in consequence 
 of which God pours out the fulness of his gracious gifts upon the 
 regenerate. [3] It is therefore carefully to be distinguished from 
 that indwelling which is mentioned in Acts 17 : 28; for, although 
 in this passage a substantial union of God with man is expressed, it 
 must be of a different character from the other, as the one is com- 
 mon to all creatures, the other belongs to believers ; therefore the 
 one, as a special union, is distinguished from the other as a general 
 union. [4] JThis union is characterized further as a " mystical 
 union (because it is a great mystery (Eph. 5 : 32), the specific 
 mode of which is unsearchable), also as spiritual (since it is 
 brought about not in a carnal or corporeal, but in a spiritual and 
 supernatural manner, by the Holy Spirit graciously dwelling in 
 the regenerate)." Holl. (934). As we are unable to give a 
 more specific representation of the nature and manner of this union, 
 we limit ourselves to the removal of erroneous views of it. It 
 would be wrong to suppose that in this union the two substances, 
 the divine and the human, are united in such a manner that the 
 two substances become one, or that the one is absorbed in the 
 other ; or, as if one of the two persons, God and man, one person 
 
486 APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION. 
 
 would be constituted, as in the case of the two natures in Christ. 
 The mystical union is therefore not a substantial [5] and not a 
 personal union. [6] 
 
 [1] In regard to the order in which the mystical union follows upon 
 the preceding regeneration and justification, Quen. (Ill, 621): " Re- 
 generation, justification, union, and renovation are simultaneous, and, 
 being more closely united than the ingredients of an atom {quovis puncto 
 mathematico arctiores) so cohere that they cannot be separated or rent 
 asunder. Yet, according to our mode of conceiving of them, justifica- 
 tion and regeneration are prior in order to the mystical union. For 
 when, in regeneration, a man receives faith, and by faith is justified, 
 then only does he begin to be mystically united to God. But renova- 
 tion is subsequent to union, for from good works, which are the effects 
 of renovation, the existence both of justification and the mystical union 
 is inferred, a 'posteriori; therefore they follow each other in this order, 
 according to our conception. Regeneration precedes that faith may be 
 attained. Justification follows, which is of faith ; the mystical union 
 then occurs, which is succeeded by renovation and sanctification." 
 
 According to another mode of considering this, it may be said that 
 union precedes justification, inasmuch as faith precedes justification ; 
 and in faith as the organ, by which the union is effected, its beginning is 
 already presupposed. Therefore Holl. (933), after consenting to this 
 view, adds: "Although the mystical union, by which God dwells in the 
 soul as in a temple, may, according to our mode of conception, follow jus- 
 tification in the order of nature, it is however to be acknowledged that 
 the formal union of faith, by which Christ is apprehended, put on, and 
 united with us, as Mediator and the author of grace and pardon, logi- 
 cally precedes justification. For faith is imputed for righteousness, so 
 far as this receives the merit of Christ, and so unites it with ourselves 
 as to make it ours." 
 
 The union may be conceived as an act, inasmuch as it takes place in- 
 stantaneously, and is then more particularly to be defined as a uniting 
 {unitio) " or the act of union, which is transient and momentary, and 
 takes place at the same time with regeneration and justification ;" or, 
 "as a state which is properly and specifically called union (unio), and 
 remains unbroken as long as the justified person avoids voluntary sins." 
 
 [2] Quen. (Ill, 623): " The mystical union does not consist merely 
 in the harmony and tempering of the affections, as when the soul of 
 Jonathan is said to be united to David, 1 Sam. 18:1, but in a true, 
 real, literal, and most intimate union; for Christ, John 17 : 21, uses the 
 
THE MYSTICAL UNION NOT FIGURATIVE BUT REAL. 48T 
 
 phrase, ' to be in some one,' which implies the real presence of the thing, 
 which is said to be in, not figuratively, as a lover in the beloved. The 
 mystical union does not consist alone in the gracious operation of the 
 Holy Spirit in believers. For when Christ says, John 14 : 23, l I and 
 my Father,' etc., and 5:16,' the Holy Spirit,' etc., these are not names 
 of operations but persons. And it is entirely wanton to convert such 
 emphatic words, expressing a reality (iirapKTiKa), by which this mystical 
 union is described, into mere energetic expressions (hep-y^nm) , for ex- 
 ample, to come, to be sent into hearts, to dwell, to remain, to live 
 in any one. For these are personal properties, and not attributes of 
 operations." 
 
 [3] Holl. (932) defines: "The mystical union is the spiritual con- 
 junction of the triune God with justified man, by which he dwells in 
 him as in a consecrated temple by his special presence, and that, too, 
 substantial, and operates in the same by his gracious influence." Quen. 
 (Ill, 622): "The mystical union is the real and most intimate con- 
 junction of the substance of the Sacred Trinity and the God-man Christ 
 with the substance of believers, effected by God himself through the 
 Gospel, the Sacraments, and faith, by which, through a special approxi- 
 mation of his essence, and by a gracious operation, he is in them, just 
 as also believers are in him; that, by a mutual and reciprocal imma- 
 nence they may partake of his vivifying power and all his mercies, be- 
 come assured of the grace of God and eternal salvation, and preserve 
 unity in the faith and love with the other members of his mystical 
 body." While Quen. thus, already in his definition of the mystical 
 union, incorporates with it union with Christ, the God-man, Cal. 
 (X, 526) distinguishes between the spiritual union of the regenerate 
 with the triune God and the conjunction with Christ the God-man ; and 
 he thus defines the latter: "The mystical union of Christ with the 
 believer is a true and real and most intimate conjunction of the divine 
 and human nature of the theanthropic Christ with a regenerated man, 
 which is effected by the virtue of the merit of Christ through the Word 
 and Sacraments ; so that Christ constitutes a spiritual unit with the re- 
 generated person, and operates in and through him, and those things 
 which the believer does or suffers he appropriates to himself, so that the 
 man does not live, as to his spiritual and divine life, of himself, but by 
 the faith of the Son of God, until he is taken to heaven." And he 
 specifies, as the accompaniments and consequences of the mystical union 
 of believers with Christ (p. 568), "A spiritual anointing; the designa- 
 tion of Christians [the anointed] taken from this; the mystical espousal 
 with Christ. The mystical anointing is that by which the regenerate, 
 
488 APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION. 
 
 having been consecrated to the Holy Spirit by virtue of Christ's anoint- 
 ing, have been furnished with his gifts as spiritual prophets, priests, and 
 kings, (p. 572) : The espousal of Christ with believers is that by which 
 he eternally marries himself to believers through faith, so that they be- 
 come one spirit, and by his power communicates to them, as to his spir- 
 itual bride, intimate and enduring love, all his blessings and all his 
 glory, so as finally to lead them to his home, and unite with them in 
 his celestial and eternal kingdom." The Form. Conc. hints at the 
 mystical union when (Sol. Dec, III, 65) it designates as false the as- 
 sertion that "not God himself, but only the gifts of God, dwell in 
 believers." The extremes or limits of the mystical union are then thus 
 defined : " The essence of the subjects to be united are, on the one part, 
 the divine substance of the whole Trinity, 2 Pet. 1, 4, and the sub- 
 stance of the human nature of Christ, John 15: 1, 2, 4; 1 Cor. 6: 
 15-17; Eph. 5: 30; Gal. 2: 19, 20. On the other part, the substance 
 of believers, as to body and soul, 1 Cor. 6 : 15, 19; Eph. 5 : 30." The 
 form of this union consists " in a true, real, intrinsic, and most close 
 conjunction of the substance of the believer with the substance of the 
 Holy Trinity and the flesh of Christ." Quen. (Ill, 619) proves the 
 Mystical Union "(1) from the promise of Christ, John 14: 23, 26; 15: 
 26. But formally to come to any one, denotes accession and approxi- 
 mation to him, and thus the advent of the sacred Trinity to believers, 
 and the 'presence not only of his gifts, but likewise of his essence itself. 
 (2) From the indwelling in believers, Eph. 3 : 17; Rom. 8: 9; 2 Cor. 
 6 : 16. (3) From the unity of believers with God, John 17: 21. The 
 gradation which Christ uses in this place indicates that the spiritual 
 union, whereby he (v. 23) is in believers, is more intimate than that by 
 which the believers (v. 21) are one with God through the communion 
 of the Spirit ; and likewise in the mode and form it differs from that 
 which is described in v. 22, where believers are said to be one with 
 each other on account of the unity of faith, love, and hope, for there is 
 superadded a full statement of the consummation (which he explains in 
 the words : ' I in them and thou in me, that they may be made perfect 
 in one.') (4) From the partaking of the divine nature, 2 Pet. 1 : 4." 
 
 This Mystical Union is further described in the Sacred Scriptures by 
 the expressions : the espousal of believers with Christ, Hos. 2:19; the 
 mystical marriage of Christ and the Church, Eph. 5 : 32 ; the union of 
 the members and of the head, Eph. 1 : 22, 23 ; the insertion of the 
 spiritual branches in the spiritual vine Christ, John 15 : 4-7 ; the abid- 
 ing of the whole Trinity with regenerate man, John 14: 23. 
 
 [4] Cal. (X, 511) : " Although we do not admit an essential union, 
 
THE GENERAL AND THE SPECIAL UNION. 489 
 
 after the manner of a graft that coalesces in one numerical essence with 
 the trunk of the tree, yet we think that here there takes place not only 
 that common union of men with the substance of God, of which we are 
 told in Acts 17: 28, nor only a union of human substance and accident, 
 or operations, and of the divine movements; but Ave assert that the sub- 
 stance of the believer is united with the substance of the entire Holy 
 Trinity through a conjunction of substance to substance, without exten- 
 sion or contraction of the divine or human essence, by a change of man- 
 ner only, which according to God's gracious will is different in this life 
 from what it will be in eternal life." 
 
 Holl. (933) : " The general union is that whereby all believers and 
 unbelievers live and move and have their being in God. As fishes in 
 water and birds in the air, so all men live and move and are in God, be- 
 cause he gives to all life and breath and all things." Quen. (Ill, 614) : 
 " The general union of all men with the substance of God the Creator 
 is indicated in Acts 17: 28, where the preposition ' in ' expresses the 
 general presence of God with men. Hugo Grotius explains the particle 
 h by a Hebraism, so that in him would be by him, by his favor. But 
 there is no necessity of departing from its ordinary acceptation. For 
 neither is the origin only expressed, that we are of him, but in addition 
 the divine izEpLx^priciq, that in him we live and move and are." 
 
 The special union is partly "a gracious one, in the church militant, 
 whereby God dwells in the regenerate by his substantial presence, and 
 operates in them by his special concurrence, John 14: 23; 17: 11, 21," 
 and partly a "glorious one, in the triumphant assembly of the elect, 
 whereby God fills and delights the elect with the plentitude of his grace. 
 1 Cor. 15 : 28." Holl. (933). As, therefore, in the general union 
 there is likewise assumed a connection of the divine substance with man, 
 and not merely a gracious operation, the special union is distinguished 
 from it in this way, that in it a new approximation of the divine essence 
 and one different from the omnipresence is assumed, " which is so 
 limited to the believer that the divine substance cannot be said to be 
 present in this way to the wicked and other creatures ; and thus the 
 manner of the presence in this union is expressed by a new approxima- 
 tion of the substance." In reply to the objection: "Whatever as to its 
 substance is already present, in that while it is present, it is necessarily 
 present, nor can it be absent, and therefore it cannot be said that it 
 comes, draws nigh, or approximates by its substance anew ; but, as the 
 Sacred Trinity as to its substance, or the divine essence by the common 
 and general presence, is already present to all creatures, so also to be- 
 lievers ; therefore he cannot approach them by a new and special pres- 
 32 
 
490 APPLICATION OF KEDEMPTION. 
 
 ence," Quen. answers (III, 629) : " (1) The substance of the Holy 
 Spirit willed to unite itself in a peculiar manner with the dove, and 
 thus to manifest itself to the Baptist, so that where the dove might be, 
 there it could correctly and truly be said that the substance of the Holy 
 Spirit was present in that peculiar kind of presence. (2) That the di- 
 vine essence, as essence, could admit of such an approximation without 
 the danger of its losing immensity, the peculiar mode of its presence in 
 Christ proves, in whom the divine nature is so united to the finite 
 human nature, that in this way it neither is nor wishes to be anywhere 
 else ; which presence is determined, certainly not by a new mode of 
 operating, but by the intimate immanence of one near substance in an- 
 other. And although this presence is very peculiar, yet it cannot be 
 denied, because it may be deduced from the hypostatical union, that 
 such an approximation is not entirely repugnant to the divine essence." 
 And the position is constantly maintained, that as the union in general 
 is not a mere gracious operation of the Holy Spirit, so the special union 
 does not differ from the general merely by a new and special mode of 
 operating, but by a new.approximation of the essence, and that distinct 
 from that common mode of presence. 
 
 [5] Quen. (Ill, 624): " This union does not consist in transubstan- 
 tiation, or the conversion of our substance into the substance of God and 
 of Christ, or vice versa, as the rod of Moses was converted into a ser- 
 pent. Nor in consubstantiation, so that of two united essences there is 
 formed one substance." Holl. (939) : " (a) God dwells in us as in 
 temples, by the favor of the mystical union, 1 Cor. 3 : 16; but the habi- 
 tation is not changed into the inhabitant nor the inhabitant into the 
 habitation, (b) By the mystical union we put on Christ, Gal. 3 : 27, 
 but the garment is not essentially one with the person who wears it. 
 (c) The divine nature is very distinct from the human, although God 
 comes to us and makes his abode with us, John 14 : 23, for he can de- 
 part from man to whom he has come. The mystical union is, there- 
 fore, indeed, called a union of substances, but strictly taken not a formal 
 substantial union (such as is that of a graft which coalesces with the 
 trunk into the essence of the tree numerically one), but it is an acciden- 
 tal union. If, then, it be called a substantial union, as by many, it is 
 not "from the mode of union, but from the terms, because a human sub- 
 stance is united to a divine." 
 
 [6] Quen. (111,624): "The mystical union does not consist in a 
 personal union or a coalition of extremes united into one hypostasis or 
 person, such as is the union of the divine and human nature in Christ ; 
 so that the believer, united to Christ, could say, I am Christ." Holl. 
 
RENOVATION IN A WIDER OR NARROWER SENSE. 491 
 
 (939): "Paul teaches that Christ and believers being mystically united 
 remain distinct persons, Gal. 2 : 20." Quen. (Ill, 624) adds : " The 
 mystical union differs from the sacramental union and communion. 
 The antithesis here is that of: (1) The Weigelians and Schwenkfeldians, 
 who maintain that the mystical union with God, as to its mode, is essen- 
 tial and corporeal. (2) That of some Scholastics, Papists, Socinians, 
 and Arminians, who deny that God remains in believers by a special 
 mode of substantial presence." Holl. (941). 
 
 § 48. {p.) Of Renovation. 
 
 It is not enough that man learns to know his sins and hate 
 them, nor that in regeneration he becomes able to grasp the merit 
 of Christ by faith ; God desires also that man should exercise 
 this turning away from sin and this return to him in a moral life, 
 that he cease to be the old and become a new man, leading day 
 by day a more holy life before God. And God himself works in 
 this direction by his divine grace, seeking to draw off man more 
 and more from sin, and to encourage and strengthen him for that 
 which is good. This operation, however, wrought by God in 
 man, is called renovation, so far as through it a change is wrought 
 in man, in consequence of which he may be called a new man ; [1] 
 also sanctiftcation, so far as now his life begins to become holy. [2] 
 Holl. (946): Renovation is an act of grace, whereby the Holy 
 Spirit, expelling the faults of a justified man, endows him with 
 inherent sanctity. [3] The change that takes place in man con- 
 sists further in this, that by the influence of divine grace the sin 
 still cleaving to man disappears, more and more, and gives place 
 to an increasing facility for doing what is good. [4] As, how- 
 ever, the sinfulness yet remaining in man yields only through a 
 constantly repeated struggle against sin, this renovation is not a 
 sudden, but a gradual one, susceptible of constant growth ; [5] 
 and as sin never entirely leaves man, it is never perfect, [6] al- 
 though we are always to strive after perfection. Finally, it is a 
 work of God in man, yet of such a nature that there is a free co- 
 operation on the part of man, who now in conversion has received 
 new spiritual powers." [7] 
 
 [1] Renovation, too, is taken in a wider and narrower sense. Br. 
 (593) : " Renovation in general denotes any action by which old things, 
 
492 APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION. 
 
 or things which are injured or weakened or corrupted by age, or in any- 
 other way, are restored. So in the spiritual renovation of man, taken 
 more widely, the old man, as to his entire condition, that is, the de- 
 ficiency of every kind of spiritual power, the guilt and dominion of sin, 
 is destroyed : and the new man as to his entire extent, that is, his spir- 
 itual strength, freedom from guilt, and the habitual gift, by which the 
 dominion of sin is subdued, is said to be produced, 2 Cor. 5 : 17, sqq.; 
 where men who are in Christ are said to be new creatures. To this is 
 referred the reconciliation with God and justification by Christ, v. 19, 
 21." (In which wider sense renovation is taken in the Form. Conc, 
 Sol. Dec, II, 70, in the Ap. Conf., Ill, 40.) In the Holy Scriptures 
 the word is taken in this wider sense in Heb. 6 : 6. Br. (594) : 
 "Renovation, strictly speaking, signifies a certain real and intrinsic 
 change in the regenerated or converted man. This is taken transitively 
 (as the action of God producing in us holy impulses and actions ; as he 
 is said to give a new heart and a new spirit, Ez. 36 : 26, to renew the 
 spirit within us, Ps. 51 : 11), and intransitively (so far as men furnished 
 with divinely imparted strength are said to renew themselves, making 
 for themselves a new heart and a new spirit, Ez, 18 : 31 ; to lay aside 
 the old man and put on the new, Eph. 4: 22, 24"). To this Holl. 
 remarks (950) : " There is really no difference between transitive and 
 intransitive renovation ; because (a) it denotes the same change, by 
 which from the old man the new comes forth, from a sinner a saint, 
 which is called transitive, on account of its connoted dependence on God 
 as the agent who produces it in another ; but on the part of the subject, 
 regarded as a form of an immanent act, it is called intransitive ; (b) 
 both are accomplished by the same power, viz., not human but divine, 
 which the Holy Spirit possesses originally and independently, the re- 
 generate dependently and on account of the mystical union with God." 
 Quen. (Ill, 632) thus discriminates renovation from regeneration 
 and justification : " Renovation differs (a) as to the efficient cause, re- 
 generation and justification are actions of God alone ; renovation is in- 
 deed an action of God, but not of God alone, for the regenerate man 
 also concurs, not in his own strength, but through divinely granted 
 power, (b) As to the subject. Man altogether dead in sins is the sub- 
 ject of regeneration; the sinner, indeed, is the subject of justification, 
 Rom. 4 : 5, 17, yet one recognizing his sins and believing in Christ ; 
 but the subject of renovation is man already justified, (c) As to the 
 object. Regeneration is occupied with the production of faith, justifica- 
 tion with imputable righteousness, renovation with inherent righteous- 
 ness, (d) As to the form. Regeneration consists in the bestowment of 
 
RENOVATION DISTINGUISHED FROM REGENERATION. 493 
 
 spiritual life, and a transfer from a state of wrath to a state of grace ; 
 justification in the remission of sins and the imputation of Christ's 
 righteousness ; but renovation in a reformation of the mind, will, and 
 affections, and so of the whole man, or in a restoration of the divine 
 image, commenced in this life and to be completed in the next, (e) 
 As to the properties. Both regeneration and justification are instantane- 
 ous; renovation is progressive, from day to day." (Grh. (VII, 294): 
 " Regeneration, properly so called, like carnal generation, does not ad- 
 mit of degrees. But renovation does, because the interior man is re- 
 newed from day to day." " (/) As to the order. Regeneration pre- 
 cedes justification, and justification precedes renovation. Renovation is 
 related to justification as an effect to a cause, and follows it, not in the 
 order of time, but of nature. Therefore Paul does not use these words 
 indiscriminately. Tit. 3 : 5." 
 
 [2] It is likewise taken either in a wider se?ise, so that it embraces in 
 its limits calling, illumination, conversion, regeneration, justification, 
 and renovation, as Eph. 5 : 26 ; Heb. 10 : 10 ; or in a narrower sense, 
 so that it coincides with renovation, strictly speaking, as in Rom. 6: 19, 
 22; 1 Thess. 4: 3, 4, 7. Br. (594): "The conferring and obtaining 
 of internal {or inherent) holiness is here meant; for although, in another 
 respect, there is indeed in the act of justification the imputation of an- 
 other's holiness, namely, Christ's (to which the passages 1 Cor. 1 : 30 ; 
 Heb. 10 : 14, may be referred), yet men themselves here are perfecting 
 holiness in the fear of the Lord, 2 Cor. 7 : 1." "In accordance with 
 this the predicate of sanctity can be ascribed to the new man, but he is 
 holy, not of himself, but of grace, Ps. 86 : 2 ; 1 Cor. 6:11; holy, not 
 so much in himself as in Christ, Phil. 1 : 1 ; 1 Cor. 1:2; holy, not by 
 completed, but by commenced and continued holiness, Phil. 3 : 12." 
 Holl. (956). 
 
 [3] Holl. (947): " Renovation is an act of applying grace by which 
 the Holy Spirit abolishes the inherent remains of sin in the justified 
 man that it may not reign, and produces in him internal and external 
 affections conformed to the divine will, and thus spiritually good, that, 
 being erjdowed with the renewed image of God, he may live piously, 
 soberly, and justly, to the glory of God the most holy." 
 
 Br. (607), (representing renovation more as a state) : " Renovation 
 is a combination of spiritual acts which the regenerate man, God assist- 
 ing graciously by his Word and Sacraments, puts forth by means of the 
 spiritual strength afforded him, as to his intellect, will, and sensual ap- 
 petite, in order to destroy the remains of sin, and to acquire greater 
 sanctity, in the way of salvation, to the glory of God." 
 
494 APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION. 
 
 [4] Quen. (Ill, 634): " The old man is the starting-point (terminus 
 a quo), the new man the goal (terminus ad quern), Eph. 4: 22; Col. 
 3 : 10." Holl. (553): " The remains of sin are the starting-point of 
 renovation, i. e., those remaining in justified men, after illumination, 
 conversion, and regeneration, and which are to be abolished by daily 
 renovation, that they may be diminished and suppressed, although they 
 cannot in this life be entirely eradicated; to wit, some defect of the 
 spiritual powers on the part of the intellect in regard to knowledge, on 
 the part of the will to the pursuit of spiritual good, on, the part of the 
 sensual appetite to obey the higher faculties, together with a proclivity 
 of these faculties of the soul to evil. The point to which renovation tends 
 is those greater powers which, after illumination, conversion, and regen- 
 eration, are conferred upon the justified by the Holy Spirit, viz., a more 
 clear and comprehensive understanding or knowledge of spiritual things, 
 inherent righteousness and holiness in the will, a prompt obedience of the 
 sensual appetite, rendered to the superior faculties ; these things being 
 unitedly conferred, the divine image is restored." 
 
 " The form of renovation consists in the expulsion of mental errors 
 and the illumination of the mind, Col. 3 : 10 ; Rom. 12: 2; in the rec- 
 tification of the will and the renewing of righteousness and true holiness, 
 Eph. 4 : 24 ; in the restraining of the appetites inclined to evil ; in the 
 purity and chastity of the affections ; in the employment of the members 
 of the body in works of righteousness, Rom. 12 : 1 ; in the subduing of 
 the dominion of sin, Rom. 6; 13, 19." 
 
 [5] Holl. (955): "As the body of sin in process of time is more and 
 more weakened by the regenerate man, so the regenerate man is trans- 
 formed more and more into the image of God from glory to glory by the 
 Holy Spirit (2 Cor. 3: 18; 4: 16). The body of sin, Rom. 6: 6, is 
 called figuratively the old man, as it is a compound of many sins, as of 
 parts and members. As formerly criminals were affixed to the cross, 
 their limbs were bruised, mortified, buried, and corrupted, so success- 
 sively the old man is crucified when the desires of his flesh are restrained 
 and as if bound ; he is bruised, 1 Cor. 9 : 27, so far as the flesh is kept 
 under, the external pleasures of this world being removed ; being bruised, 
 he is mortified, Rom. 8 : 13, so far as the strength to emerge is taken 
 from sin ; mortified, he is buried, Rom. 6 : 4, inasmuch as the memory 
 and the thought of illicit things are removed ; buried, he corrupts, so 
 that the entire body of sin is abolished, here inchoatively and continu- 
 ously, in the life to come completely, Rom. 6: 6." Renovation is there- 
 fore to be considered a continually progressive action both on God's 
 and on man's part. Quen. (Ill, 636): "The Holy Spirit renews man, 
 
RENOVATION A GRADUAL WORK. 495 
 
 while by means of the organs of grace, the Word and Sacraments, he 
 enkindles in him various pious inclinations; indeed, renovation is nothing 
 but those continuous acts by which actual sanctity is effected in man, 
 carried on, continued, and preserved.'' Therefore, also, renovation is 
 distinguished (Holl., 956) as Ci commenced, continued, and com- 
 pleted." 
 
 [6] Qcen. (Ill, 636): " Renovation in this life is partial and imper- 
 fect, admitting degrees, and therefore it never attains the highest acme 
 of perfection. For sin remains in the regenerate, affects their self-con- 
 trol, the flesh lusts against the Spirit, and therefore our renovation pro- 
 gresses from day to day, and is to be continued through life, 2 Cor. 4 : 
 16. The want of perfection in renovation does not arise from the im- 
 potency of God, who renews, but from the incapacity of man, who is the 
 recipient of the divine action." It can therefore have augmentations 
 and diminutions. Quen. (Ill, 636) : " Renovation is increased by 
 godly acts and frequent efforts. These being intermitted or diminished, 
 a diminution follows, so there is at one time an increase, at another a 
 decrease. The Sacred Scriptures expressly affirm that the renovation 
 of the regenerate in this life ought continually to increase and grow, 
 Eph. 4: 16." 
 
 The question whether the new man, if sin still cleaves to him, can be 
 considered spiritual, Holl. (957) decides thus : " When a renewed man 
 is called spiritual, the reason of the denomination is derived from that 
 which is preponderant, to wit, from the prevailing spirit ; but when the 
 same is called carnal, the reason is derived from that which is subordi- 
 nate, to wit, from the flesh, subdued indeed, but rebelling and resisting, 
 with which man justified, placed in the way of life, is continually carry- 
 ing on war." 
 
 [7] Quen. (Ill, 633): " The first efficient cause is the entire Trin- 
 ity (1 Thess. 5 : 23 ; John 15: 4, 5) ; terminatively* and appropria- 
 tely, the Holy Spirit (Rom. 15 : 16 ; Tit. 3:5; Rom. 1:4; Gal. 5 : 
 22)." Holl. (949) : " The regenerate and justified man concurs in 
 the work of his sanctification as a secondary cause, subordinate and 
 
 * [For the ground of this distinction, see § 19, Note 22, last paragraph. As ap- 
 plicable to this article, Holl. (344) has very clearly presented it thus : " Sanctifi- 
 cation is, indeed, a divine action ad extra, and therefore is undivided, or, in other 
 words, is common to all three persons of the Godhead, and accordingly is ascribed 
 also to God the Father, John 17 : 17, and God the Son, Heb. 9 : 14. But in the 
 Holy Scriptures and the Apostles' Creed the Holy Spirit is characterized by an 
 outward mark of discrimination, as it were, so that he is said to sanctify us termin- 
 atively, Rom. 15 : 16. ; '— Tr.] 
 
496 APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION. 
 
 moved by God, so that he renews himself daily by the powers which he 
 has received from above. The Holy Spirit produces in man, without 
 human concurrence, the power to produce good works and the first act 
 of sanctification, but man concurs in the second act of sanctification, or 
 in the exercise and continuance of it, when once introduced by the 
 Holy Spirit. . . . The regenerate man co-operates with God in the 
 work of sanctification, but not by an equal action, but in subordination 
 and dependence on the Holy Spirit, because he works, not with native 
 but with granted powers. This is inferred from the words of the apos 
 tie, Phil. 2: 12, 13." 
 
 SUPPLE MENTAEY* 
 § 49. Of Good Works. 
 
 Eenovation makes itself known by good works. [1] By these 
 we understand such, acts performed by the regenerate in accord- 
 ance with the divine will, [2] whether they be outward visible 
 acts or inward acts, impulses, and movements in man. [3] They 
 are called good works, not as though they were good and perfect 
 in themselves, [4] for such cannot be performed by sinful men, 
 [5] but because they are the outgrowth of a good disposition, 
 well pleasing to God, and because they proceed from the faith of 
 one who is reconciled to God. [6] They cannot be produced, 
 therefore, until man has been regenerated, because not until then 
 does such a disposition, wrought by the Holy Ghost and well 
 pleasing to God, dwell in man, and not until then has he become 
 able to do what is good ; [7] wherefore, even those acts of the 
 
 *Most of the Dogmaticians discuss the doctrine of good works immediately after 
 that of faith. (Grh. (VIII, 1) : " The article of good works conveniently follows 
 the doctrine of justification by faith. For, although we are justified by faith 
 without works, and thence good works are to be removed from the forum of justi- 
 fication, yet that true and living faith by which we are justified is not without 
 works, since the blessings of justification and sanctification, regeneration and 
 renovation, are united in a constant and indissoluble bond.") We here follow, 
 however, the arrangement of Br., because the connection of faith and justification 
 would be too much broken bv the introduction between them of the doctrine of 
 good works. 
 
OF GOOD WORKS. 497 
 
 ■un regenerate which externally correspond with the divine law 
 cannot at all be called good works. [8]. Such good works, how- 
 ever, must be wrought by the regenerate ; not, indeed, as though 
 they had thereby to justify themselves before God, or to merit 
 their salvation, for unless they were already justified, they could 
 not perform good works ; but for this reason, that thereby they 
 show their obedience toward God, whose will it is that he be 
 honored by a holy life and good deeds, and that thereby they at 
 the same time, through them, demonstrate the actual existence 
 of such a believing disposition ; for where this exists it inwardly 
 impels them to the performance of good works with the same 
 necessity with which the good tree produces good fruits. [9] 
 This necessity is, therefore, no compulsion that is imposed from 
 without upon man, nor does it destroy his Christian liberty ; 
 rather, this exhibits itself by the very fact that man now, with 
 inward pleasure, and under promptings of his own, can accom- 
 plish what the law of God demands of him. [10] And for this he 
 has a right, too, to expect reward from God ; but this is a gra- 
 cious reward, and the prospect of such reward is not the leading 
 motive for the performance of such good works. [11] 
 
 [1] Br. (607): " To the doctrine concerning renovation belongs that 
 of good works, which partly are related to renovation as an end and 
 effect, and partly they have respect to its formal reason." 
 
 [2] Holl. (1190): " Good works are free acts of justified persons; 
 performed through the renewing grace of the Holy Spirit, according to 
 the prescription of the divine law, true faith in Christ preceding, to the 
 honor of God and the edification of men." 
 
 [3] Ap. Conf. (Ill, 15): "We profess, therefore, that there is a 
 necessity for the law to begin in us and to increase more and more. 
 And we embrace both together, viz., spiritual emotions and external 
 good works." Holl. (1190): "By works here are understood not 
 only external visible actions (which proceed from the hand or tongue), 
 but internal affections of the heart and movements of the will, and thus 
 the entire obedience and inherent righteousness of the regenerate. A 
 distinction is therefore to be made between internal and external good 
 works. The former are seen by the eyes of God alone, and comprise 
 the inner thoughts of the mind, the movements of the will, and the pure 
 affections of the heart (such as love, the fear of God, confidence towards 
 God, patience, humility). The latter are seen not only by God, but 
 
498 
 
 APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION. 
 
 likewise by man, and manifest themselves by outward demeanor, words, 
 and actions. It has seemed good to holy men of God to use the appel- 
 lation of works rather than habits or affections, as all the praise of true 
 virtue consists in action, and as external works are more known than 
 internal qualities and affections ; finally, as the works of the regenerate 
 alone are deserving of the praise of good works." Quen. (IV, 306) : 
 " A good work is that which God commands, and which is done with 
 the disposition, manner, and purpose for which it has been commanded." 
 Holl. (1198) adds also : "A good intention is to be accounted among 
 good internal works." 
 
 [4] Holl. (1190): "The works of regenerate and justified men are 
 called good, not absolutely, as if they were perfectly good, but in their 
 kind, because (a) they derive their origin from the good Spirit of God, 
 Ps. 143 : 10 ; (b) they proceed from a good heart, Matt. 12 : 35 ; (c) they 
 are in some degree conformed to the good will of God, expressed in the 
 law, Rom. 12:2; and (d) they design a good end, the glory of God." 
 Quln. (IV, 306): " The works of the regenerate, in themselves con- 
 sidered, are not perfectly good, but are rendered sordid and polluted by 
 the stain of sin ; but in Christ they are perfectly good, and in such a 
 sense that what is not done in them is pardoned through and on account 
 of Christ, and what is wanting to their perfection is compensated for by 
 the imputation of the most perfect obedience of Christ." 
 
 [5] Much more, all good works are imperfect. Holl. (1199): "The 
 good works of regenerated and renovated men do not reach that degree 
 of perfection that they cannot increase (Eph. 4: 15), nor do they per- 
 fectly correspond to the divine law (Rom. 7 : 14), nor are they so com- 
 plete that they can sustain the rigid scrutiny of divine justice (Ps. 143: 
 2), but they are imperfect (James 3 : 2)." Br. (612): " Since sin has 
 entered the world, and adheres tenaciously even to regenerated men, 
 so that the flesh constantly strives against the Spirit, it happens that 
 we do not do the things that we would (Gal. 5: 17). And so, some- 
 times, in the circumstances of good actions, we err and stumble, or do 
 not operate with that promptitude and alacrity which are due, but 
 with diminished zeal ; or we pollute our works, however good, by an 
 inordinate self-love attending or following." In this is already embraced 
 the rejection of works of supererogation (works not due, to which man is 
 not bound by the divine precept). Holl. (1202): "As the works of 
 the regenerate, to the performance of which they are bound by the di- 
 vine law, are not perfect, much less are those which they are not bound 
 to do performed in a perfect manner." 
 
 [6] Holl. (1191): " The source through which the renewed man 
 
GOOD WORKS IMPOSSIBLE WITHOUT FAITH. 499 
 
 performs good works is true and living faith in Christ (Gal. 5:6), which 
 is called the cause of good works by emanation (Matt. 5 : 16)." The 
 form or formal reason of good works is, therefore, " when they are consid- 
 ered absolutely and in themselves the hvo/iia or conformity with the law of 
 God (which is the rule and canon of good works) ; but, wiien relatively 
 reference is had to the special favor of God, so far as, although they 
 may not exactly correspond to the law, they nevertheless please God, 
 their form is faith in Christ." (Id. 1193.) 
 
 Grh. (VIII, 1 4): " Since the works of even the regenerate are imper- 
 fect and impure, therefore that they may please God, it is necessary that 
 faith in Christ should be added, on account of whom apprehended by 
 faith, not only the person but likewise the good works of the regenerate 
 please God, hence it is said that faith is the form of good works in the 
 regenerate." Ap. Conf. (Ill, 68) : " ' Works,' which, although they 
 are performed in the flesh not yet entirely renovated, which retards 
 the motions of the Holy Spirit and imparts some of its own impurity, 
 nevertheless on account of faith are holy and divine works, the offerings 
 and administration (politia) of Christ showing his kingdom before the 
 world." Holl. (1193): " Although these works are imperfect and im- 
 pure, they are nevertheless acceptable to God, because their stains are 
 covered with the veil of Christ's most perfect obedience, which the re- 
 generate apply to themselves and make their own by faith." As the 
 adequate and infallible rule of good works is designated : " The divine 
 law, comprehended in the decalogue, which perfectly and sufficiently 
 commands the things to be done, and prohibits the things that are to be 
 shunned, Deut. 12: 32." Holl. (1192): But the conscience of the 
 renewed (1 Cor, 4: 4) is discarded as a primary and simply infallible 
 rule ; much more the dictates of right reason, and the law of nature, 
 though the former may have authority as a secondary norm, so far as it 
 applies the divine Law to a particular or single action, and shows what 
 is to be done here and now. Even the Gospel is not the norm or direc- 
 tive principle of good works, but rather a conferring principle (because 
 it confers the Holy Spirit, through whose impulses, and communication 
 of strength and co-operation we do good), and productive (because it 
 produces faith, the basis of every good action). Comp. Form. Conc. 
 (Sol. Dec, VI, 10 seq.) : " It is distinctly to be explained, what the 
 Gospel contributes to the new obedience of believers, and what (as to 
 the good works of believers) is the office of the Law. For the Law 
 teaches that it is the will and command of God, that we should lead a 
 new life ; but it does not give us strength and faculties with which we 
 can commence and afford the new obedience. But the Holy Spirit, who 
 
500 APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION. 
 
 is given and received by the preaching not of the Law but of the Gos- 
 pel, renews the heart of man. Afterwards the same Spirit uses the 
 ministration of the Law, that by it he may teach the regenerate, and 
 show them in the decalogue what is that good and acceptable will of 
 God (Rom. 12 : 2), that they may know that good works are to be ob- 
 served, as those which God hath before ordained that we should walk in 
 them (Eph. 2: 10)." 
 
 [7] Ap. Conf. (Ill, 4): " Because faith brings the Holy Spirit and 
 produces a new life in the heart, it is necessary that it should produce 
 spiritual affections in the heart. After we are justified by faith and re- 
 generated, we begin to fear God, to love, to ask and expect assistance 
 of him . . . we begin likewise to love our neighbors, because our hearts 
 have spiritual and holy emotions. These things cannot take place 
 unless, being justified by faith aad regenerated, we receive the Holy 
 Spirit. . . . Likewise, how can the human heart love God while it per- 
 ceives him to be dreadfully angry, and to be oppressing us with tem- 
 poral and perpetual calamities? But the Law always accuses us, and 
 constantly shows that God is angry. Therefore, God is not loved till 
 after we have obtained mercy through faith." 
 
 [8] Form. Conc. (IV, 8): "Although those works which tend to 
 the preservation of external discipline (such as are performed also by 
 unbelievers and men not converted to God, and are indeed required of 
 them), have their dignity and praise before men, and are honored by 
 God with temporal rewards in this world, yet as they do not proceed 
 from true faith, they are really sins before God ; that is, contaminated 
 with sin, and are reputed as sins and impurity by God, on account of 
 the corruption of human nature, and because the individual is not recon- 
 ciled to God, Matt. 7:18; Rom. 14 : 23." 
 
 Holl. (1193): "The upright works of unregenerate men (whether 
 they be out of the Church or have an external connection with it, 
 Grh. (VIII, 6) ), which contribute to external order and the preser- 
 vation of society, are civilly and morally to some extent good; but they 
 are not good theologically and spiritually, nor do they please God; and, 
 therefore, inasmuch as they are destitute of the constituents of really 
 good works, they are properly called splendid sins." When, for in- 
 stance, on the basis of Rom. 2 : 14, it is conceded, that even the unre- 
 generate may do the things of the Law, this is thus restricted: " The 
 will of man can in some measure attain civil righteousness, or the right- 
 eousness of works ; can speak of God; can worship God in an external 
 manner, obey the magistrate, and parents in the selection of worldly 
 pursuits, can restrain the hands from slaughter, from adultery, from 
 
THE W0RRS OF THE UNREGENERATE. 501 
 
 theft." Ap. Conf. (VIII, 70). But spiritually good works are thus 
 characterized: "(1) They are the fruits of the Spirit, Gal. 5 : 22. (2) 
 They are performed by persons reconciled to God through Christ. (3) 
 They proceed from a pure heart, a good conscience, and faith unfeigned. 
 1 Tim. 1: 5. (4) They are spontaneous and free actions. (5) They 
 are directed to the glory of God." (Holl. 1194.) The requisites of 
 truly good works are wanting, therefore, in the works of the unregen- 
 erate, and in addition, " This defect of their actions is not supplied by 
 the imputation of another's righteousness, since the unregenerate do not 
 accept and apply to themselves by faith the vicarious obedience of 
 Christ." Holl. (ib.) Further it is admitted, that an action not only 
 in its outward manifestation is good and right, but that in addition good 
 is done by it; yet it is not really good on that account, as it is not pro- 
 duced in the right spirit. Quen. (IV, 312) : "Although, therefore, 
 some of the actions of unregenerate men are not vicious in themselves 
 and as to their substance, they are, nevertheless, by way of accident 
 vicious, viz., because they are devoid of the requisites of really good 
 works before God. Wherefore, when even the virtuous actions of un- 
 believers are called sins by Augustine, Luther, and others, it is not in 
 respect to the very matter or substance of the actions, nor so far as they 
 are undertaken and performed according to the views of right and wrong 
 remaining in this corrupt nature since the fall (for in this manner we 
 grant that they are good), but in respect to the efficient, formal, and 
 final cause of works, by which their good or bad quality is to be esti- 
 mated in God's judgment, to wit, because their works are polluted and 
 contaminated by sins, as they are not performed by a person reconciled 
 to God, and regenerated by the Holy Spirit, nor to the glory and honor 
 of God." 
 
 [9] Ap. Conf. (Ill, 68) : " The works are to be done on account of 
 the command of God, likewise for the exercise of faith, further on ac- 
 count of confession and giving of thanks." Quen. (IV, 308): "Good 
 works are not indifferent or arbitrary, but evidently necessary for every 
 man, particularly indeed the regenerate, not indeed by a necessity of 
 constraint. Good works should be spontaneous and free, not con- 
 strained. For they are necessary, neither to acquire salvation (as a 
 means), nor to earn salvation (as a merit), nor to attain salvation (as an 
 indispensable condition or cause), nor to reach it (as a mode of coming 
 to a final goal), nor, finally, to preserve it (as a conserving cause). But 
 we hold good works to be necessary, by the necessity, (1) of the divine 
 command, Mai. 1:6; Matt. 5 : 44 ; (2) of our duty or of gratitude due 
 for the benefits of creation, redemption, etc.; (3) of presence (that they 
 
502 APPLICATION OP REDEMPTION. 
 
 may not lose the grace of God and faith, and fall from the hope of the 
 inheritance, although not by reason of an efficacy to obtain righteous- 
 ness and salvation); (4) of a divinely appointed order and sequence to 
 justification and faith, because as effects they necessarily follow their 
 cause." The Form. Conc. (Epit. IV) decides in regard to the expres- 
 sions : " Good works are necessary to salvation ;" " good works are in- 
 jurious to salvation," thus: " This is our belief, doctrine, and confes- 
 sion, I. That good works as surely and undoubtedly follow true faith as 
 the fruits of a good tree. II. That good works are to be entirely ex- 
 cluded, not only when justification by faith is the subject, but even when 
 our eternal salvation is discussed. III. All men indeed, especially 
 when they are regenerated and renewed by the Holy Spirit, are under 
 obligation to do good works. IV. And in this statement the words 
 necessary, due, ought, are used correctly, for they do not conflict with re- 
 generation and the form of sound words. V. But by the words necessity, 
 necessary, when, for instance, the subject is the regenerate, constraint is 
 not to be understood, but only that due obedience, which true believers, 
 inasmuch as they are regenerate, perform, not by compulsion or by the 
 force of the law, but with a free and spontaneous spirit. . . . VI. We 
 confess, when it is said, that the regenerate do good works with a free 
 and spontaneous spirit, that this is not to be taken in such a sense as 
 though it were left in the will of regenerate man, to do good or evil, as 
 he thinks proper; and nevertheless to retain his faith although he may 
 intentionally remain in sin." The two expressions (good works are 
 necessary, injurious to salvation,) are rejected as liable to misapprehen- 
 sion. 
 
 [10] Holl. (1203) : " Good works are not actions free from the ne- 
 cessity of obligation or duty, but are said to be actions free from the 
 necessity of constraint (because they are not extorted by the threats of 
 punishment, or externally, and in appearance, performed contrary to the 
 will), and of immutability (since the will is no longer determined to the 
 constant thought and perpetration of evil, as before conversion ; but can 
 freely choose, and do good works by supernatural strength, received 
 from the Holy Spirit ; can likewise choose evil works by the remains of 
 the flesh, still adhering to it, since it is not determined to good as the 
 angels are) ; and are performed by the regenerate, freed from the servi- 
 tude of sin by the Holy Spirit (John 8 : 36 ; Rom. 6 : 18 ; 2 Cor. 3 : 
 17)." 
 
 [11] Ap. Conf. (Ill, 73) : " We teach that rewards are proposed 
 and promised to the works of believers. We teach that good works are 
 deserving, not of pardon, grace, or justification, for we obtain these 
 
REWARD OF GOOD WORKS. 503 
 
 solely by faith, but of other bodily and spiritual rewards in this and a 
 future life." 
 
 Holl. (1215): " The regenerate have respect in the performance of 
 good works, first, to the glory of God (1 Cor. 10 : 31); second, they may 
 have respect with filial affection to the remunerations of this and a 
 future life, not as a due reward or master's compensation, but as gratu- 
 itous gifts and divine blessings, to terminate ultimately in the glory of 
 God (ITim. 4: 8)." 
 
 Remark The greater part of the divines add further an article on 
 
 the performance of good works, which Quest, has most fully developed. 
 (IV, 309): " The performance of good works in its widest extent can 
 be called the Christian warfare. For the life of the faithful Christian 
 is a continual spiritual warfare, Job 7 : 1 ; 1 Tim. 1:18; 2 Tim. 2 : 3. 
 
 He fights by faith, hope, and patience The enemies against whom he 
 
 must fight, are the devil, the world, and the flesh. — The arms of the 
 spiritual warfare are described, 2 Cor. 10 : 4, 5 ; Eph. 6 : 10, and fol- 
 lowing : 1 Pet. 5 : 8. — The standard under which we fight is the banner 
 
 of the cross, Matt. 16 : 24 Definition : This Christian warfare is a 
 
 daily contest, and an eternal enmity to everything which is opposed to 
 the will of God and his kingdom." Upon this follow the chapters, 
 " (1) on the cross, which is painful suffering, sent by God as a merci- 
 ful father to believers for a limited time, to the glory of the author and 
 the salvation of the sufferer (351); (2) on prayer, a religious act, by 
 which the Christian calls as a suppliant on the Triune God and Christ 
 the God-man, . . . with true confidence of heart, relying on the merit 
 of the Mediator alone, and his intercession, to the glory of God and his 
 own and others' salvation." (354.) (Holl. treats only of prayer, Br. 
 of neither.) 
 
PART IY. 
 
 OF THE MEANS OF SALVATION. 
 
 § 50. Preliminary Statement. 
 
 r I ^EE Holy Ghost employs external and visible means, by 
 -*- which he produces in men the effects above described, [1] 
 and appropriates to them salvation in Christ, and we can only 
 then consider an effect as certainly produced by the Holy Spirit 
 when it has been brought to pass through these external means. 
 [2] These means of grace, as they are called, are the Word of 
 God and the Sacraments. All those, then, who through these 
 means have become partakers of the salvation in Christ, consti- 
 tute an association which we call the Church. 
 
 Part IY, hence, treats, (1) Of the Word of God ; (2) Of the 
 Sacraments as the means of grace; (3) Of the Church. [3] 
 
 F. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 Of the Wokd of God. 
 
 treating of the Word of God [4] we consider its efficacy, and 
 the division of its contents. 
 
 § 51. The Efficacy of the Word of God. 
 
 As the Holy Spirit, through whom alone men are converted, 
 operates only by the Word, this Word must possess the power 
 of producing in man all those effects which are described in the 
 preceding article, On the State of Grace. And this power is of 
 
THE WORD AND SACRAMENTS. 505 
 
 such a character that it is always attended with success when no 
 opposition is made to it on the part of man. [5] Hence the 
 Word is endowed with efficacy, i. e., u it has an active, supernatu- 
 ral, and truly divine force or power of producing supernatural 
 effects; in other words, of converting, regenerating, and renewing 
 the minds of men." 11 Hence the Word of Grod does not confine it- 
 self merely to teaching man externally the way of salvation and 
 showing him the means whereby to attain it. [6] Its power is 
 not to be compared to the convincing force which even an elo- 
 quent human discourse possesses ; hence its power is not a natural 
 one, such as dwells in every human word, but it is supernatural. 
 [7] This power is inherent in the Word because the Holy 
 Ghost attends it ; from the moment that a Word of God is ut- 
 tered, the Holy Ghost is inseparably and continually connected 
 with it, [8] so that the power and efficacy of the Word is fully 
 identical with that of the Spirit ; [9] it is a truly divine efficacy ; 
 [10] and, just as we cannot conceive of the Holy Ghost as sepa- 
 rate from this efficacy, so neither can we conceive of the Word 
 of God as independent of it. [11] We are not, then, in any way 
 to represent to ourselves the relation of the Word and the Spirit 
 as though the Word were merely the lifeless instrument which 
 the Holy Ghost employed, [12] or as though the Spirit, when he 
 wished to operate through the Word, must always first unite 
 himself with it, as if he were ordinarily separated from it. [13] 
 
 [1] Quex. (IT, 1): "We have heretofore treated of the grounds of 
 our salvation; we must now consider the means by which we attain to 
 it. The means, properly so called, on the part of God, are the Word 
 and Sacraments, the saving antidotes to our spiritual disease." 
 
 The Word and Sacraments are also designated as means of salvation 
 under the general idea of the Word, — as the Sacraments are designated 
 as the visible word. 
 
 Conf. Aug. (T, 2). Form. Cong. (Sol. Dec, XI, 76): "The 
 Father will draw none to himself without means, but he employs his 
 Word and Sacraments as the ordinary means and instruments." Art. 
 Smalcald. (Till, 3) : " We must firmly maintain that God bestows 
 his Spirit and grace on none unless through the Word and by the ex- 
 ternal Word previously declared, that we may fortify ourselves against 
 the enthusiasts, who boast they have the Spirit before the Word and 
 33 
 
506 THE MEANS OF GRACE. 
 
 without it, and therefore they judge, bend, and distort the Scriptures, 
 or oral Word, as they please, as Miinzer did, and many others at present 
 do, who wish to discriminate very acutely between the Spirit and the 
 letter." Holl, (991) : " The means of salvation are divinely ordained, 
 by which God graciously offers the salvation acquired by Christ, the 
 Mediator, to all men who have fallen into sin, and bestows and pre- 
 serves true faith in them, and at last introduces all who embrace- the 
 merit of Christ and persevere in it into the kingdom of glory." 
 
 [2] Form. Conc. (Sol. Dec, II, 56) : " We should not and cannot 
 always judge of the presence, operations, and gifts of the Holy Spirit 
 from our feelings (the manner and time, viz., when they are exper- 
 ienced in the heart) ; but, inasmuch as these are often cloaked under 
 much infirmity, we should be convinced from the promise that the Word 
 of God preached and heard is assuredly the ministry and instrument of 
 the Spirit, by which he truly and efficaciously operates in our hearts." 
 
 [3] From what was said in the remarks preliminary to the articles 
 on Faith and Justification, it follows that we cannot entirely adhere to 
 the systematic division of the Dogmaticians in this Part IV. They do 
 not treat, namely, of Faith and Works until under this head, and they 
 call Faith also a means of salvation, according to which, therefore, they 
 embrace more than do we under the phrase, means of salvation. This 
 they can do, because they distinguish between " the means of salvation 
 on the 'part of God, donna, or those offering salvation (the Word and 
 Sacraments), and the means of salvation on our part, Ti/jTrriKdv, or that 
 apprehending the offered salvation (faith in the merit of Christ)." In 
 this section the Dogmaticians also treat the subject of the last things 
 (death, resurrection of the dead, etc.), inasmuch as they designate these 
 as means " in a general sense, or executive and isagogical, that is, means 
 divinely instituted, without the previous occurrence of which God does 
 not accomplish the sentence of glorification, and by the final interven- 
 tion of which men persevering in the faith are introduced into heaven." 
 
 As we have assigned to the article of faith another place, it also ap- 
 pears better to separate that of the last things from this section, so as to 
 confine ourselves, in it, to the proper and limited conception of the 
 means of grace. 
 
 [4] The Word, which, in the article Of the Sacred Scriptures, was 
 described as the source of knowledge, is here viewed as a means of 
 grace. 
 
 Holl. (992) : " The Word of God is here considered not as the 
 source of knowledge, but as the means of practice or action, by whose 
 intervention the sinner is led by God to eternal salvation." 
 
THE EFFICACY OF THE WORD. 507 
 
 The Dogmaticians remark, in advance, that by the Word they do not 
 understand the bare external letters of the written Word. Quen. (I, 
 169) : "We must distinguish between the Word of God as it is materi- 
 ally expressed and exhibited for the written characters, points, letters, 
 and syllables adhering to paper or parchment ... or also for the sound 
 and the external words formed in the air . . . and formally consid- 
 ered, as the divine conception and sense are expressed in the written 
 letters and syllables and in the words of the preached Gospel. In the 
 former sense it is called the Word of God only figuratively (uT/fiavriKu-); 
 in the latter, however, Kvpiog-, properly and strictly, it is the Word of 
 God, the wisdom of God, the mind of God, the counsel of God. We 
 ascribe not to the former, but to the latter, divine power and efficacy." 
 
 Cat. Maj., Decal. (101): "Such is its virtue and power that 
 where it is recalled to mind, or heard and considered with serious at- 
 tention and interest, it never passes away without fruit, but always 
 engages, retains, and excites the hearer with some new intelligence, de- 
 light, and devotion, and purifies his feelings and thoughts. For the 
 words are not putrid or dead, destitute of sap and vigor, but truly living 
 and efficacious." 
 
 The Symbolical Books do not express themselves distinctly on the 
 efficacy of the Word of God. The more fully stated views of the fol- 
 lowing Dogmaticians, according to which this efficacy or power is super- 
 natural, if not precisely in the language of the Symbolical Books, are 
 still in accordance with the opinions maintained in them. 
 
 [5] Quen. (I, 170): "The innate power and tendency of God's 
 Word is always to convince men of its truth, unless its operation is hin- 
 dered and prevented by voluntary self-assertion and contumacy super- 
 added to a natural repugnance." Hence the Word is to be regarded as 
 producing an effect wherever it is used ; but at the same time it de- 
 pends on the conduct of men whether it has the special effect designed 
 by its author. " The second act is considered either as the evepysia and 
 operation or as the effect itself. If it be regarded as the energy and 
 operation, then it always accompanies the Word of God preached, read, 
 or heard, i. e., it always exerts itself when legitimately used, since the 
 Word of God is never inoperative, but always operative. But, if it be 
 considered as the effect itself, this does not always follow in consequence 
 of the impediment interposed by the subject, or on account of the hard- 
 ness of the hearts upon which it operates. Although, therefore, the 
 effect of the preached Word is sometimes hindered, yet the efficacy or 
 intrinsic virtue itself cannot be taken away or separated from it. And 
 thus accidentally it may be inefficacious, not from a deficiency of power, 
 
508 THE MEANS OF GRACE. 
 
 but by the exercise of perverseness, which hinders its operation so that 
 its effect is not attained." . . . Hence the power of the Word is not 
 irresistible, but resistible (171). This efficacy, as belonging to the Word 
 of God generally, is predicated both of the Law and the Gospel, yet 
 with a distinction. 
 
 Quen. (I, 170) : " When we attribute to the Word a divine power 
 and efficacy of producing spiritual effects, we wish not to be understood 
 as speaking of the Gospel only, but also of the Law. For, although the 
 Law does not produce these gracious results directly and per se, i. e., 
 kindle faith in Christ and effect conversion, for this is rather ascribed 
 to the Gospel, still the letter is not on this account dead, but is effica- 
 cious after its kind ; for it killeth, 2 Cor. 3:6; it worketh wrath, Rom 
 4: 15, etc." 
 
 [6] Holl. (992) : " The efficacy of the divine Word is not only 
 objective or significative, like the statue of Mercury, for instance, which 
 points out the path, but does not give power or strength to the traveller 
 to walk in it, but it is effective, because it not only shows the way of sal- 
 vation, but saves souls." 
 
 [7] Quen. (I, 170) : " The Word works not only by moral suasion, 
 by proposing a lovely object to us, but also by a true, real, divine, and 
 ineffable influence of its gracious power, so that it effectually and truly 
 converts, illuminates, etc., the Holy Spirit operating in, with, and 
 through it; for in this consists the difference between the divine and the 
 human word." 
 
 Br. (123) : " (The Sacred Scriptures have an active, supernatural 
 force or power) which is to be sought neither in the elegance of its style, 
 nor in the sublimity of its thoughts, nor in the power of its arguments; 
 but it is far superior to every created and finite agency." 
 
 It is a supernatural power in distinction from that which human elo- 
 quence possesses. But in another aspect it is also called natural, inas- 
 much as the Word of God cannot be conceived of without such an 
 efficacy. Quen. (I, 172) : " We say that there is a natural efficacy in 
 the Word of God, because it naturally belongs to it, and its essence and 
 nature are such that it could not be the true Word of God unless it con- 
 tained within itself that divine power and virtue to convert men, etc., 
 etc." Br. (124), however, observes: " To avoid ambiguity and dis- 
 putes we avoid the use of this term." 
 
 [8] Holl. (993): " A divine power is communicated to the Word 
 by the Holy Spirit joined with it indissolubly." Hence, there is a na- 
 tive or intrinsic power and efficacy belonging to the Word, deeply in- 
 herent in it. The Dogmaticians draw proofs of this, (1) From the qual- 
 
SUPERNATURAL POWER OF THE DIVINE WORD. 509 
 
 ities which the divine Word ascribes to itself, John 6 : 63 ; Rom. 1:16; 
 Heb. 4: 12, 13; 1 Thess. 2: 13; 1 Pet. 1 : 23 ; James 1: 21. (2) 
 From the similar supernatural and divine operations which are ascribed 
 to the Word of God and the Holy Spirit, ex. gr., calling, 2 Tim. 2:14; 
 illumination, 2 Pet. 1 : 19 ; conversion, Jer. 23: 29; regeneration, 1 
 Pet. 1 : 23 ; justification, 2 Cor. 3:9; sanctification, John 17 : 17. (3) 
 Holl. (ib.): " The Word of God, as such, cannot be conceived of with- 
 out the divine virtue or the Holy Spirit, who is inseparable from his 
 Word. For if the Holy Spirit could be separated from the Word of God, 
 it would not be the Word of God or of the Spirit, but a word of man. 
 Nor is there any other Word of God, which is in God, or with which 
 men of God have been inspired, than that which is given in the Scrip- 
 tures or is preached or treasured up in the human mind. But, as it can- 
 not be denied that that is the divine will, counsel, mind, and the wis- 
 dom of God, so it cannot be destitute of the divine virtue or efficacy." 
 
 [9] Quen. (I, 183): " We are to assume here not only a certain con- 
 junction or union of distinct actions, or even a unity of aims or effects 
 (air'oTe?,£cuaTov or hvepyrm&Tuw), but also a unity of energy and operation. 
 For the Holy Spirit does not by himself do something, and the Word of 
 God by itself something else, in the conversion of men, but they produce 
 the one effect by one and the same action. For such is the peculiar nature 
 of the principal and subordinate causes, intrinsically united together, 
 that they produce an effect by one and the same action. Thus the soul 
 and the eye see by a single action, and not by distinct actions." 
 
 [10] Br. (124): " Truly that same infinite virtue which is essentially 
 per se and independently in God, and by which he enlightens and con- 
 verts men, is communicated to the Word, and, although it is communi- 
 cated to the Word, yet it must be considered as divine. " . . . But it 
 by no means follows from this that there is a commingling of God and 
 the Word in regard to this divine power ; hence Br. (128) says : "They 
 frequently and diligently impress it upon us that the same virtue belongs 
 to God and the Scriptures, but not in the same way ; for that of God is 
 essential, fundamental, original, and independent, while that of the 
 Scriptures is dependent aud participative or derived." . . . Hence it is 
 said of the Word that it exhibits its power and efficacy bpyavuctir, or in- 
 strumentally. . . . Quen. (I, 172) : " The divine Word is not the prin- 
 cipal agent in the work of conversion, regeneration, and salvation, but 
 it is only a suitable means or organ which God ordinarily uses in pro- 
 ducing spiritual effects, not indeed by necessity or indigence, as if he so 
 bound his efficacy in the conversion of men to his Word that he could 
 not convert men without any means, or by any other means or organ 
 
510 THE MEANS OF GRACE. 
 
 than his Word if he wished, but of his own free will, because thus it 
 pleased God. 1 Cor. 1 : 21." 
 
 [11] Quen. (I, 170): " Whether the Word "be read or not, whether it 
 be heard and believed or not, yet the efficacy of its spiritual effects is 
 always intrinsically inherent in it by the divine arrangement and com- 
 munication, nor does this divine efficacy only come to it when it is used. 
 For the Word of God, as such, cannot even be conceived of apart from 
 the divine virtue and gracious working of the fioly Spirit, because this 
 is inseparable from the Word of God." 
 
 Holl. (993) uses the following figures : "It possesses and retains its 
 internal power and efficacy even when not used, just as the illuminating 
 power of the sun continues, although, when the shadow of the moon in- 
 tervenes, no person may see it ; and just as an internal efficacy belongs 
 to the seed, although it may not be sown in the field." 
 
 In order to avoid misapprehension, it is expressly observed that the 
 Word does not operate physically (by the contact of an agent, as opium,' 
 poison, fire, etc.), but morally (by enlightening the mind, moving the 
 will, etc.), and there is a distinction made betAveen the efficacy of the 
 Word considered in the first act and in the second act, or between effi- 
 cacy and efficiency. When it is said that the Word operates extra usum, 
 when not used, it is only meant that the power is constantly inherent in 
 the Word, just as the power to give light always exists in the sun ; so 
 that, when the Word is to produce a certain effect, the power must not 
 first come to it ; but that the Word exercises its legitimate influence 
 only where it is properly used." / 
 
 Quen. (1, 171): " The first act is the operating power dvvafit? hepyrrrud?; 
 the second act is the real operation. The Word does not exhibit its ef- 
 ficacy in the second act unless in the legitimate use of it." 
 
 Quen. (ib.) (from his Theses against Rathman) : "The distinction 
 we make is not unreasonable, between the power or the first act and the 
 divine operation or second act of the outwardly read or preached Word. 
 Per se, and in itself, it always is a power, or has in itself a power, to 
 move all readers and hearers, hypocrites as well as believers and con- 
 verted persons, which is not & physical power, physically included in the 
 letter, like that of medicine, but it is a divine power, which is always 
 communicated to the read or preached Word by the Holy Spirit. But 
 this power, although it is always present in the preached Word, yet it is 
 not always operative on all." Holl. (994) illustrates this by the fol- 
 lowing example : " The hand of a sleeping man does nothing, yet neither 
 is the power of action bestowed on it in vain, nor is the hand thus inop- 
 erative, dead." 
 
MYSTICISM AND ENTHUSIASM. 511 
 
 The Lutheran theologians, in general, had reason to illustrate very 
 particularly the doctrine of the operation of the Word of God, in order 
 to oppose the Enthusiasts and Mystics, who held that the Holy Spirit 
 operated rather irrespectively of the Word than through it ; and to op- 
 pose also the Calvinists, who, led by their doctrine of predestination, 
 would not grant that the Word possessed this power per se, but only in 
 such cases where God chose; and hence the position that the Word also 
 possesses a power extra usum was specially defended against Rathman 
 (1628), who denied it, and who appears to have maintained only an ob- 
 jective efficacy of the Word of God. (Quen. (I, 174) gives the follow- 
 ing opinions of Rathman : " Rathman compares the Word of God to a 
 statue of Mercury, to a picture, to a sign, and even to a channel, 
 namely, to instruments altogether passive and inoperative. He asserts, 
 moreover, that the divine efficacy is external to the Word of God, sep- 
 arable from it at any moment, and merely auxiliary (irapaaTariKov) ; that 
 the Holy Spirit with his virtue joins himself to the Word only in the 
 mind or heart of man, and only then when it is legitimately and sav- 
 ingly used.") But an efficacy extra usum must necessarily be main- 
 tained, if the Word of God is not to be put on a precise level with every 
 human word. 
 
 Holl. (992) thus sums up the doctrine: " The Word of God is the 
 most efficacious means of salvation, for its power and efficacy are not 
 only objective, but also effective; not consisting in moral suasion, but in 
 supernatural operation ; not external and coming to it when used by 
 men, but intrinsic in the Word ; not accidental, but necessary, by a di- 
 vinely ordained necessity, and therefore not separable, but perpetual, 
 inherent in the Word itself extra usum, as the first act. This efficacy 
 is truly divine, producing the same effect as the Holy Spirit, who is per- 
 petually united with the Word, which (effect) the Spirit influences to- 
 gether with the Word, by the divine power which belongs to the Holy 
 Spirit originally and independently, but to the divine Word communi- 
 catively and dependently, on account of its mysterious, intimate, and in- 
 vidual union with the Spirit." 
 
 [12] Quen. (I, 171): "We must distinguish between the mere nat- 
 ural instruments, such as the staff of Moses, the rod of Aaron, etc., em- 
 ployed by God to produce a supernatural effect, and his essential super- 
 natural means, such as the Word of God and the Sacraments. The 
 former are destitute of a new motive or elevating power wherewith to 
 produce a new effect beyond their proper and natural power ; but the 
 latter, from their very origin and production, are endowed with a suffi- 
 cient, i. e., a divine and supreme power and efficacy, nor do they need 
 
512 MEANS OF GRACE. 
 
 % 
 
 any new and peculiar elevating power beyond the ordinary efficacy al- 
 ready infused into them for producing the spiritual effect." The later 
 theologians, therefore, prefer calling the Word a means rather than an 
 instrument of the Holy Spirit, although they do not hold that the latter 
 expression, which is used also in the Symbolical Books, is altogether 
 inadmissible, provided that no mere lifeless instrument is thereby under- 
 stood. 
 
 MusiEus (in Br., 131) distinguishes between "instruments which are 
 not united with an operative cause, unless they be in use, such as an 
 axe, hammer, etc., and instruments which always have an operative 
 cause impliedly and virtually united with them even when not used;" 
 and he holds that the expression instrument, in relation to the Word of 
 God, is admissible only in the latter sense. Another distinction is that 
 which is made between passive and co-operative instruments. But Quen. 
 (I, 186) says : " We grant that the Word of God may be called the in- 
 strument or organic cause of conversion, etc., namely, when considered 
 concretely and as administered, so far as the Word of God is externally 
 read or preached. For these external means are truly organs, into 
 which the Spirit enters with his virtue and efficacy." 
 
 [13] Hulsem. (in Quen., I, 186) says : " That elevation of the 
 sense of the Word, as they call it, is by no means an accessory and 
 separate power of the Holy Spirit, which may sometimes be absent from 
 the Word ; but the Word of God embraces in itself, by its own natural 
 constitution, wonderful and inexplicable divine energy and power of 
 penetration, far better adapted than the sentences of Seneca and Cato to 
 arouse the minds of readers. 
 
 § 52. The Law and the Gospel. 
 
 The Word of God is divided, according to the different results 
 it produces in men, whose salvation it is to effect, into Law and 
 Gospel. [1] 
 
 I. The Law, in which God, by command and prohibition, has 
 made known his will to men, and to the fulfilment of which he 
 has obligated them, [2] is, according to its widest extent, partly 
 general and partly applicable to all times, and partly given for a 
 certain period and under certain circumstances. The former is 
 called the moral Law, inasmuch as it contains the precepts of God 
 relating to our moral conduct, which remain unchanged at all 
 times, and concern all rational creatures. [3] The latter is called 
 the ceremonial and forensic Law, inasmuch as it contains the cer- 
 
THE LAW AND THE GOSPEL. 513 
 
 emonial and civil precepts which were given to the Jews during 
 the period of the Jewish theocracy. [4] We have here to con- 
 sider only the former, as the other has already been abrogated 
 by God. [5] The contents of it were written on the heart of man 
 at the creation (hence it is also called the Law of Nature), and 
 men, as loag as they remained in their original state, had in it a 
 perfect rule for their moral conduct ; [6] but after the fall, when 
 their knowledge was obscured and they heard the voice of God in 
 their hearts but imperfectly, it was necessary for God to adopt 
 another method of making known his will to them, and that was 
 most completely done at the delivery of the Law on Sinai. [7] . 
 
 The Law there given contains the most perfect rule for our 
 moral conduct, [8] and applies to us no less than to the Israel- 
 ites. [9] It binds us to the most perfect obedience, and threatens 
 temporal and eternal punishments in case of disobedience; [10] 
 but also promises. eternal life to him who perfectly observes it. 
 
 As, however, no one since the fall is able perfectly to keep the 
 Law, we cannot say that the Law avails for our salvation, [11] 
 but it rather serves, first of all, to lead to the knowledge of sin, 
 and render man receptive for the salvation that is in Christ. [12] 
 The former is effected by the Law, teaching us the difference 
 which exists between its requirements and our deeds. The latter, 
 by alarming us the more we come short of the requirements 
 of the Law, and by constraining and impelling us to long 
 earnestly for a refuge from the wrath of God with which he has 
 threatened every violator of this Law; thus the Law drives us 
 to Christ, who promises us such a refuge. It is also predicated 
 of it that it contains a call to repentance, and hence we include 
 within the Law everything which contributes to repentance. [13) 
 Besides this, the Law serves to maintain external propriety and 
 morality in the unregenerate : but it is serviceable to the regen- 
 erate, because it contains the perfect rule of moral life, both in- 
 ternal and external. According to these different designs for 
 which the Law was given, the use of it is divided into political, 
 elenchtical, pedagogical and didactic. [14] 
 
 II. The Gospel. As the Law contains the declaration of the 
 divine will, and promises a reward to him who keeps it, and 
 threatens punishment to him who violates it, so the Gospel, in 
 
514 
 
 MEANS OF GRACE. 
 
 distinction from the Law, contains the doctrine of the gracious 
 pardon of sins, which we receive as a gratuity for Christ's sake 
 through faith. [15] Thus, in the preaching of the Gospel, the 
 means are pointed out to men by which they may escape the 
 condemnation which the Law suspends over them. And when 
 men are brought to a knowledge of sin through the Law, the Gos- 
 pel enters, holds forth the grace of God, the merit of Christ, and 
 all the benefits therewith associated; [16] and aims at producing 
 faith in them, by which they appropriate to themselves the sal- 
 vation in Christ. 
 
 Different, then, as are the Law and the Gospel in their signifi- 
 cation, [17] yet there is no contradiction between them ; but, as 
 they were both alike given by God, so they are bofch always 
 and equally binding ; they have their design to accomplish in 
 all men, the same final result, namely, the salvation of men, [18] 
 to the attainment of which end each contributes its part. As, 
 by the preaching of the Law, knowledge of sin and repentance 
 are produced, so, by the preaching of the Gospel, faith is effected. 
 The efficacy of the one follows that of the other ; but the efficacy 
 of the one does not hence entirely cease where the efficacy of the 
 other begins ; for the Law still continues to be a rule for the re- 
 generate, to which he conforms his moral conduct, and it thus 
 works in him a penitence which is renewed daily, inasmuch as it 
 still continually convinces him of his sins. [19] 
 
 [1] The division of the Word of God, according to its historical pub- 
 lication in the world, into the Old and New Testaments, belongs to the 
 section which treats of the Scriptures. The division specified above, 
 i. e., Law and Gospel, must be treated under this article, for the design 
 here is to derive from the Word, and to illustrate, the different oper- 
 ations which must be experienced before man is fully brought to a per- 
 sonal knowledge of salvation in Christ. The division is justified by 
 John 1: 17 and 2 Cor, 3 : 6. The Law was given by Moses, e. g., 
 " The letter killeth, but the Spirit giveth life." The Law and the 
 Gospel are not then here identical with the Old and the New Testament, 
 for the Old, as well as the New Testament, contains "a preaching of 
 repentance, and a preaching of the remission of sins." 
 
 Form. Conc. (Sol. Dec, v. 23) : " These two kinds of doctrine, viz., 
 repentance and faith, were held in the Church of God from the begin- 
 
THE CEREMONIAL LAW. 515 
 
 ning of the world, yet with a proper distinction. For the posterity of 
 the patriarchs, as well as the patriarchs themselves, not only carefully 
 remembered that man in the beginning was created by God just and 
 holy, and by the guile of the serpent disobeyed the command of God, 
 and thus became a sinner ; . . . but they also encouraged and consoled 
 themselves by the most precious announcement concerning the Seed of 
 the woman, . . . and concerning the Son of David who was to restore 
 the kingdom to Israel and to become the light of the Gentiles." 
 
 [2] Holl. (996) : " The divine Law is the command of God, in 
 which this supreme Lord and Legislator prescribes that which is to be 
 done by men, and prohibits that which is to be avoided, binding them 
 to render a perfect obedience, or, in the deficiency of this, visiting them 
 with punishment." 
 
 The term Law is also used in the sense " (1) of everything that is 
 taught by God, Ps. 1:2; (2) of the Scriptures of the Old Testament, 
 John 15: 25; 1 Cor. 14: 21; (3) of the Mosaic pentateuch, Luke 
 24: 44." 
 
 Holl. (ib.) : " But here the words Law and Gospel are taken, as far 
 as they are adequately contradistinguished." 
 
 [3] Holl. (997) : " The divine Law is either universal and per- 
 petual, or particular and temporary. The universal and perpetual Law 
 is the immutable rule of all moral actions, by which God binds all men 
 to do that which is honest and right, and to avoid that which is dis- 
 honest and unjust. It is called also the moral Law. The particular 
 and temporary Law is that which God gave to the Israelites alone, and 
 bound them to the obedience of it, which ceased with the cessation of 
 the Hebrew polity, and is either ceremonial or judicial." 
 
 [4] Holl. (1026): I. "The ceremonial Law is the command of 
 God, by which the supreme Lord and Legislator bound the people of the 
 Old Testament, and through Moses prescribed to them a certain form 
 of external worship, that he might remind men of their sins, show from 
 afar to the contrite a Redeemer, and apply and seal covenant grace by 
 two Sacraments and various sacrifices. The external worship* prescribed 
 to the people of-God in the Old Testament, consisted in certain rites to 
 be observed about sacred persons, things, places, and times." 
 
 " The chief end of the ceremonial Law is the signification and adum- 
 bration of the benefits of Christ, as well as their application by 
 Sacraments and sacrifices. The subordinate end is the admonition of 
 sin, the observance of proper order in ecclesiastical assemblies and rites, 
 and the separation of the Jewish Church from all association with the 
 Gentiles." (Id., 1027.) 
 
516 MEANS OF GRACE. 
 
 II. " The forensic or judicial Law is the command of God, by which 
 he bound the Israelites in the times of the Old Testament, and through 
 Moses prescribed to them a form of political government, so that ex- 
 ternal discipline might be preserved in civil society, and that the Jewish 
 polity, in which Christ was to be born, might be distinguished from the 
 polity of other nations. The forensic Law uttered precepts concerning 
 all those things which pertained to the administration of the Israelitic 
 republic, and came under the cognizance of the forum or court of the 
 Jews." (Id., 1030.) 
 
 " The design of the forensic Law is : (1) The preservation of external 
 discipline in civil society. (2) The separation of the Jewish polity 
 from that of other nations." (Id., 1031.) 
 
 [5] Quen. (IV, 1) : " That the Jewish Law is abrogated is evident 
 from the fact that, since the destruction of the Jewish polity and temple, 
 there is no place for sacrifice or the execution of the forensic Law." 
 
 [6] Br. (389) : "It is otherwise called the Law of nature, because it 
 is employed about those things which are naturally and per se either 
 honorable or base; whether they be .such as agree or disagree with 
 rational nature. It is also called the Moral Law, in so far as it 
 relates to the morals or to the mode of life which is becoming or unbe- 
 coming to a rational creature." 
 
 Holl. (997) : " The Natural L^aw is the command of God impressed 
 naturally on the minds of all, by which they are informed and bound to 
 do those things which per se are right and honorable, and to avoid those 
 things which per se are wicked and base." 
 
 Quen. (IV, 3): "It is the light and dictate of right reason divinely 
 given to man, enabling him intellectually to discriminate between the 
 common notions of what is just and unjust, honorable and base, that he 
 may understand what is to be done and what is to be avoided." 
 
 [7] The Moral Law is therefore divided into the Natural or Connate 
 Law and the Moral Law specially so called. 
 
 Quen. (IV, 1): "In original, uncorrupted nature the natural and 
 moral Laws were entirely the same, but in corrupted nature a great 
 part of the Natural Law has been obscured by sin, and only a very 
 small part of it has remained in the mind of man ; and so a new promul- 
 gation of Law was instituted upon Mount Sinai, which Sinaitie law is 
 particularly called the Moral Law, and does not in kind differ from the 
 Natural Law." 
 
 Holl. (1002) : " The Moral Law, specially so called, is the command 
 of God superadded to the Natural Law in the divinely revealed Word, 
 which was often repeated from the beginning of the world, and at last 
 
THE MORAL LAW. 517 
 
 solemnly promulgated on Mount Sinai and reduced to writing, dis- 
 tinctly teaching what is right and forbidding what is wrong, directing 
 all our actions and feelings, binding all men to the most perfect obed- 
 ience, or, in the deficiency of this, to the most exquisite torments." 
 [Mel. Loc. Comm.: "The Law is doctrine divinely revealed, teaching 
 what we ought to be, to do and to omit to do."] 
 
 Grh. (V, 223) : " The Moral Law is summarily comprehended in 
 the decalogue." 
 
 The Dogmaticians generally hold that a primordial Law preceded the 
 Sinaitic Law, by which they understand those preparatory revelations 
 which were given to primaeval men and the patriarchs. 
 
 Holl. (1003) : " The primordial Moral Law is that which was given 
 to our first parents, Gen. 2: 17, then revealed to their posterity by the 
 voice of God, and afterwards expounded and taught more fully by the 
 patriarchs, until the solemn promulgation of the Law on Mount Sinai. 
 . . . The primordial Moral Law and the Sinaitic do not differ in sub- 
 stance of doctrine, but in the mode of revelation." 
 
 Holl. (1002) thus states the difference between the Natural and the 
 Moral Law: " The Natural Law does not differ as to matter from the 
 Moral Law specially so called, for indeed the Natural Law is summarily 
 contained in the decalogue, but it differs from it as to form. For (1) 
 the Natural Law is inwardly written by nature on the minds of men, 
 the Moral Law is promulgated externally, uttered by the voice of God, 
 and reduced to writing; (2) the Natural Law is more imperfect and 
 obscure, the Moral Law is more perfect and clear. The former directs 
 external discipline; the latter governs and rules the internal as well as 
 the external conduct of men." Concerning the Natural Law, Holl. 
 (999) further admits, that "there nevertheless remain certain vestiges 
 of it, namely, universal principles, from which the difference between 
 right and wrong is naturally apparent. Eom. 2: 15." 
 
 [8] We hence find in the Dogmaticians a very exact exposition of 
 the decalogue, comprehending the whole science of ethics. 
 
 Chm>\ (Loc. c. Th., II, 23): "Such is the brevity of the precepts 
 of the decalogue that Moses calls them ten words. And yet in that 
 brevity is comprehended everything that pertains to the love of God 
 and our neighbor, and those short sentences are to be the rule and line 
 by which we may ascertain what constitutes sin." 
 
 [9] Holl. (1019) : "The Sinaitic Moral Law is the perfect rule of 
 things to be done and things to be avoided, neither has it been enlarged 
 by new precepts added by Christ, but only more fully declared and 
 purged from pharisaic corruptions or additions." 
 
518 MEANS OF GRACE. 
 
 [10] Quen. (IV, 8) : " The internal form of the Moral Law consists 
 in a directive and constraining power with respect to doing or avoiding 
 moral acts, binding the conscience to most perfect obedience, or, if this 
 be not rendered, bringing the most dreadful punishment, temporal and 
 eternal, on the violator. James 2 : 10 ; Matt. 5 : 19; Deut. 27: 26; 
 Gal. 3: 10." And, indeed, "the Law demands conformity not only 
 in external actions, but also in internal ; neither is it satisfied with any 
 interior effort of the will, but it requires love, i. e., the most ardent 
 feelings, and indeed from the whole heart, the whole soul, and all the 
 strength." 
 
 [11] Br. (630) : "The Moral Law has been given for eternal life, 
 but upon the condition of its complete fulfilment (Luke 10: 28; Gal. 3 : 
 12). But, since the fall, no one can render this, and therefore no one 
 can be saved by the Law." Whence Holl. (1007): " The aim of the 
 Moral Law is (a) the glory of the Lawgiver; (b) eternal life, promised 
 upon the condition of perfect obedience. The accident alts sue is eternal 
 death. Rom. 8: 10." 
 
 [12] Br. (636): "The Law, which teaches what is to be done and 
 what is to be avoided, and binds to the most perfect observance of these 
 things, charging the most grievous guilt upon all manner of transgres- 
 sors, by so doing leads men to the knowledge of their sins and to grief 
 concerning them, and so renders them desirous for a mediator." Quen. 
 (IV, 9): "The subsequent aim is the knowledge of our inability, which 
 fails to fulfil the Law (Rom. 8: 3), and the urging of us to seek a reme- 
 dy." And the additional remark: " This powerlessness ascribed to the 
 Law does not belong to it per se and by virtue of its own nature, but 
 accidentally, by reason of our flesh, which weakens the law of God, al- 
 though it is in itself holy and good, and renders it powerless and unable 
 to give us life, or to preserve it, since our flesh is not able to fulfil the 
 condition of the Law, i. e., to render to it a perfect obedience, Gal. 3: 
 24 ; and this is the reason why the impossibility of saving is ascribed to 
 the Law." 
 
 [13] Form. Conc. (Epit. V, 4): "Whatever is contained in the 
 Holy Scriptures that convinces of sins, that truly belongs to the preach- 
 ing of the Law." Therefore, just as the Old Testament contains the 
 Gospel, also (comp. note 1) in like manner the New Testament contains 
 the Law. 
 
 Form. Conc. (V, 11): " Yet, meanwhile, it is true and proper that 
 the apostles and ministers of the Gospel should confirm the preaching of 
 the Law, and begin with those who as yet do not feel their sins and are 
 not disturbed by a sense of the divine wrath." Hence to the preaching 
 
THE F0UKF0LD USE OF THE LAW. 519 
 
 of the Law can be reckoned, from a certain view of the subject, even the 
 preaching of the death of Christ. 
 
 Form. Conc. (Sol. Dec, V, 12): " For what more severe and terri- 
 ble indication and declaration of the wrath of God against sin is there, 
 than the passion and death of Jesus Christ, the Son of God? But yet, 
 so far ^ this displays the wrath of God and alarms men, it is not prop- 
 erly preaching of the Gospel or Christ, but of Moses and the Law against 
 the impenitent." 
 
 [14] Holl. (1021): "(1) TJie political use of the Law consists in 
 the preservation of external discipline, that wicked and licentious men 
 may be turned away from heinous offences, by presenting before them, 
 the penalties and rewards. According to this use, the Law is a bridle or 
 barrier by which sinners are restrained. (2) The elenchtical use con- 
 sists in the manifestation and reproof of sins, and also in the demonstra- 
 tion of the most severe divine judgment. Rom. 3 : 20. According to 
 this use the Law is the mirror of sin. (But the Form. Conc. already 
 properly observes that the Law does not fully impart the designed 
 knowledge of sin until the coming of the Gospel. Form. Conc. (Epit. 
 V, 8): 'As to what relates to the revelation of sin, the matter stands 
 thus : The veil of Moses is hung before the eyes of all men, as long as 
 they hear only the preaching of the Law and nothing of Christ. There- 
 fore they do not truly come to a knowledge of their sins from the Law, 
 but either become hypocrites, who are inflated with an idea of their own 
 righteousness, as were the Pharisees, or fall into despair in their sins, 
 as Judas the traitor did. For this reason Christ undertook to explain 
 the Law spiritually, and thus the wrath of God is revealed from heaven 
 against all sinners, that the Law being rightly understood, they may 
 learn how great is that wrath. Thus at length sinners, being led to the 
 Law, properly ascertain the enormity of their guilt. But such a knowl- 
 edge of their offences Moses alone could never have extorted from 
 them.') (3) The pedagogic use of the Law consists in indirectly com- 
 pelling the sinner to go to Christ. Although the Law formally and 
 directly neither knows nor teaches Christ, yet by accusing, convincing, 
 and alarming the sinner, it indirectly compels him to seek for solace and 
 help in Christ the Redeemer. Wherefore the Law is our schoolmaster, 
 to bring us unto Christ. Gal. 3: 24. (4) The didactic use consists in 
 the instruction and direction of all internal and external moral actions. 
 Thus the Law is a perpetual rule of life. Matt. 5 : 17." 
 
 Quen. (IV, 10) : " The first use pertains to unregenerate and obsti- 
 nate sinners; the second and third to men about to be justified; the 
 fourth to those who are justified and regenerate." The Form. v Coxc. 
 
520 MEANS OF GRACE. 
 
 and the earlier Dogmaticians favor only a threefold use of the Law, 
 political, pedagogical, and didactic. The later Dogmaticians have 
 divided the pedagogical use into two parts, one of which they call the 
 elenchtical use. The question introduced in the Antinomian contro- 
 versy, whether the Law is to be inculcated to the regenerate, and its 
 observance urged on them, is thus determined by the Form^Conc. 
 (Epit. 6:4): "Although they are regenerated and renewed in the 
 spirit of their minds, yet regeneration and renovation are not perfect in 
 all respects in this life, but only begun. Believers are constantly strug- 
 gling in the spirit of their minds with the flesh, i. e., with their corrupt- 
 nature, which cleaves to us even to our death. And on account of the 
 old Adam who yet dwells in the understanding, the will, and all the 
 powers of man, it is necessary that the Law of God should always shine 
 before us." . . . When, however, the Law is still held before the re- 
 generate, its significance is thus more particularly described : " That 
 the Law here means only one thing, namely, the immutable will of God, 
 according to which all men ought to regulate their mode of life." 
 
 [15] Form. Conc. (V, 5): " We hold the Gospel to be specifically 
 that doctrine which teaches that man should believe, who has not kept 
 the Law, and is therefore condemned by it; namely, that Jesus Christ 
 has expiated. and made satisfaction for all sin, and thus has procured 
 remission of sin, righteousness before God, and eternal life, without any 
 merit intervening on the part of the sinner." Form. Conc. (V, 21) : 
 " Everything that consoles terrified minds, everything that offers the 
 favor and grace of God to transgressors of the Law, is properly called 
 the Gospel, i. e., the cheering message, that God does not wish to punish 
 our sins, but for Christ's sake to forgive them." 
 
 Br. (631): " The Gospel is the doctrine of the grace of God and 
 gratuitous pardon of sin for the sake of Christ the Mediator, and his 
 merit apprehended by faith." Hence, as far as this grace is declared in 
 the Old Testament, so far does it also contain the Gospel. (Note 1.) 
 Hence, Br. (ib.): " This doctrine was revealed not only in the New 
 Testament, but also in its own way in the Old Testament (in the New 
 more clearly)." Such intimations in the Old Testament are cited as oc- 
 curring, not only in the protevangelium to the patriarchs and prophets, 
 but also in the Ceremonial Law. Br. (632): " It is certain that those 
 things which were contained in the ceremonial laws, had the force of 
 Law, so far as they commanded certain acts and rites ; yet as faras they 
 represented Christ the Mediator, and his merit to be apprehended by 
 faith, by certain rites, such as types and shadows, they are properly to 
 be considered as Gospel." As to the relation of the Law and Gospel to 
 
DISTINCTION BETWEEN LAW AND GOSPEL. 521 
 
 the Old and New Testaments, Quen. (IV, 61) says: " The Old Testa- 
 ment and the Law, and the New Testament and the Gospel, are not 
 identical, but distinct ; for they differ as the containing and the con- 
 tained. For the Old Testament contains the Law as its part, but not to 
 the exclusion of the Gospel, and the New Testament contains the Gos- 
 pel as its portion, but not to the exclusion of the Law; and thus the 
 evangelical intention of God respecting the remission of sin, grace, and 
 salvation through the death of Christ, is declared not only in the books 
 of the New, but also in those of the Old Testament." 
 
 The word Gospel can also be used in various senses. Holl. (1032): 
 "Generally, but with less propriety, the word is used to designate the 
 whole doctrine of the New Testament, taught by Christ and the Apos- 
 tles, Mark 1:1; 16 : 15. Specially, for the doctrine of grace and the 
 gratuitous remission of sin to be obtained by faith in Christ, whether 
 proposed in the Old or New Testament, Rom. 10: 15; Heb. 4: 2. 
 Most particularly, for the doctrine concerning the Messiah already mani- 
 fested, Rom. 1 : 1." Here the word is taken in the second sense, for 
 we are to describe the effect of it, which is different from that of the 
 Law. (Holl. (ib.): "In this special sense the Gospel is sufficiently 
 contradistinguished from the Law.") In the proper discrimination of 
 these senses, the following question is also settled, whether the Gospel 
 also preaches repentance? Form. Conc. (ep. V, 6): " We believe, etc., 
 that if by the word Gospel be meant the whole doctrine concerning Christ 
 [taken, therefore, in the general sense] which he taught in his ministra- 
 tions, that we properly say and teach, that the Gospel is a preaching of 
 repentance and the remission of sins. But when the Law and the Gos- 
 pel, as Moses himself, as a teacher of the Law, and Christ himself, as a 
 teacher of the Gospel, are compared together, we believe, teach, and 
 confess, that the Gospel does not preach repentance or reprove sin, but 
 properly is nothing else than a more cheering message and an announce-? 
 ment full of comfort." 
 
 On the whole Antinomian controversy, which properly belongs in this 
 connection, see Form. Conc. (Sol. Dec, V) in which also the different 
 statements in the preceding Symbolical Books, in regard to the Law and 
 the Gospel, are explained according to the different senses given above. 
 
 [16] Form. Conc. (Sol. Dec, V., 24): « We believe and confess 
 that these two heads of Christian doctrine should be diligently taught and 
 enforced in the Church of God even to the end of time, yet with a proper 
 distinction. For, by the preaching of the Law and its severe threaten - 
 ings, through the Gospel ministry, the hearts of impenitent men are to 
 be alarmed and brought to a knowledge of their sins and to the exercise 
 34 
 
522 MEANS OF GRACE. 
 
 of repentance. But not so that they may despair on account of their 
 sins, but that they may flee to Christ. . . . Wherefore, after they have 
 come to a knowledge of their sins by the Law, their alarmed consciences 
 are to be so directed that they may receive solid consolation from the 
 preaching of the Gospel of Christ." Roll. (1038): " The Gospel 
 preaches and offers to us the grace of Christ, the merit of Christ, and all 
 the benefits derived from him." Quen, (IV, 6): " The form of it is 
 the gratuitous promise of grace, Rom. 3: 24; 4: 13, 14, 16; Gal. 
 3 : 18, through faith, John 3:16; Mark 16:16; Acts 10 : 43 ; Rom. 
 10:9,10." 
 
 [17] The distinctions are stated by Holl. (1039) as follows : " The 
 Moral Law and the Gospel differ: (1) As to the manner of their revela- 
 tion and recognition. The Law is in some measure known from the 
 light of nature ; for it was communicated to the mind of man at his 
 creation, and it was not entirely extinguished by the fall, Rom. 2 : 15. 
 But the Gospel is a mystery plainly concealed from human reason, 
 brought to us from the bosom of the eternal Father by the Son of God, 
 and revealed to us. (2) As to the object. The Law is the doctrine of 
 works ; it prescribes and commands what is to be done and avoided, 
 hence it is called the law of works, Rom. 3: 27. But the Gospel is the 
 doctrine of faith ; it holds forth Christ as the Mediator, his merit, the 
 righteousness and salvation derived therefrom to be apprehended by 
 faith; therefore it is called the law of faith, Rom. 3: 27. (3) As to 
 the difference of the promises. The promises of the Law are conditional 
 and compensatory ; they indeed promise life, but under the condition of 
 individual, perfect and perpetual obedience. But the promises of the 
 Gospel are gratuitous, because they promise life, not on account of our 
 own obedience, but of another's, namely, of Christ, apprehended by 
 true faith. The promises of the Gospel are, therefore, absolute and un- 
 conditional, not simply, but in respect to legal and meritorious condi- 
 tion, although they do not exclude the evangelical condition or faith, 
 which is destitute of all merit, and the use of the means of faith. (4) As 
 to the subject, to whom they are declared. The Law is to be uttered and 
 sharply inculcated to wicked and contumacious sinners, that they may 
 be brought to contrition; the Gospel is to be applied to the contrite, that 
 they may believe in Christ. (5) As to the disparity of the effects. The 
 Law accuses delinquents of disobedience, convicts, condemns, alarms, 
 Rom. 3 : 20 ; 4: 15 ; 2 Cor. 3:2; but the Gospel exhibits the Saviour, 
 consoles, absolves, vivifies, Luke 2 : 10 ; 4: 18; 2 Cor. 3: 6." Holl. 
 (996) makes another distinction, which may be here quoted : " The di- 
 vine Law is not the causative or conferring means of salvation to fallen 
 
THE LAW AND GOSPEL. 523 
 
 man, but it is only the pedagogic means to a sinner seeking the causa- 
 tive means of salvation, Gal. 3 : 24. The Law leads to Christ not di- 
 rectly, but as disease leads to the physician, indirectly and on account 
 of the manifested inability of obtaining salvation by the Law." 
 
 [18] Br. (633) : " The Law and the Gospel agree (a) as to the au- 
 thor of both, who is God; (b) as to the subject to whom they are given, 
 namely, all men ; (c) as to their design, which is eternal salvation ; (d) 
 as to their duration, which is the end of the world." 
 
 [19] Holl. (1041): "The Law and the Gospel practically are 
 united, as if in a certain mathematical point. They concur in produc- 
 ing : (1) the repentance of sinners (repentance consists of two parts, 
 contrition and faith, and so it is the hiroTklzoiia, or the common effect of 
 converting and regenerating grace. The Law, in converting man, does 
 its part by exciting and producing contrition. The Gospel, in regenerat- 
 ing man, also does its part by enkindling faith in Christ. There results, 
 therefore, repentance, as the effect, from the concurrence of the Law 
 and the Gospel) : (2) the renovation of a justified person (in sanctifica- 
 tion the Law is at hand as a normative principle, or the rule of a holy 
 life; it prescribes and teaches what is to be done and what omitted, and 
 binds to obedience, but it does not confer new strength for a spiritual 
 and holy life ; therefore the Gospel comes in as a succor and productive 
 principle, which furnishes strength and power to men, enabling them 
 rightly to walk in the ways of God. Wherefore the Law and the Gos- 
 pel concur in producing one holy act in the work of renovation) ; (3) 
 the 'preservation of the renewed man in perseverance of faith and godli- 
 ness (the Law by its threatenings moves the renewed man the more 
 strictly to suppress his carnal desires, lest conquered by the flesh, he 
 should lapse into mortal sin, and fall away from the faith ; the Gospel, 
 by constantly affording new strength, confirms and increases his faith, 
 so that the renewed man perseveres in faith and holiness. Add to 
 this that the Gospel alone shows the difference between mortal and 
 venial sin. The Law prohibits both, that the renewed man, conscious 
 of his imperfection, may practice a daily repentance. The Gospel con- 
 soles his mind, grieving under a sense of his imperfect obedience and 
 sin, by teaching him that there is no condemnation to them who are 
 in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit, Rom. 
 8: 1)." 
 
524 MEANS OF GRACE. 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 Of the Sacraments. 
 
 § 53. Of the Sacraments in General. 
 
 QAVING grace is imparted to man not only through the 
 ^ Word, but also through the Sacraments; [1] and, as in the 
 case of the Word, so also in the case of the Sacraments, an ex- 
 ternal and visible element, which in the sacred rite is offered to 
 man, becomes the vehicle of the Holy Ghost. [2] A Sacrament 
 is, therefore, a holy rite, appointed by God, through which, by 
 means of an external and visible sign, saving grace is imparted 
 to man, or, if he already possess.it, is assured to him. [8] The 
 Evangelical Church enumerates only two such rites, Baptism and 
 the Lord's Supper; for only through these two rites, in accord- 
 ance with the direction of Christ, is such saving grace imparted ; 
 and, among all the sacred ordinances prescribed in the Scriptures, 
 it is only in these two that these two distinguishing characteris- 
 tics are combined, viz., (1) a special divine purpose, in accord- 
 ance with which, in the sacred rite, an external element is to be 
 thus employed; and (2) the promise given in the divine Word 
 that by the application of this element evangelical saving grace 
 shall be imparted. [4] By these marks these two sacred rites are 
 distinguished from all other religious services, and hence, for the 
 purpose of thus distinguishing them, are called Sacraments. [5] 
 In the element thus consecrated by the Word, we have presented 
 to us then no longer merely that which is obvious to the senses, 
 but we have, at the same time, to assume something invisible and 
 more exalted as present and operating through the elements; so 
 that, therefore, the Sacrament consists of both something visible 
 and something invisible. [6] From what has been said, it fol- 
 lows, further, that just as a religious service can be called a Sac- 
 rament only when both the above-mentioned marks are combined 
 in it, so also it is not a Sacrament, and does not operate as such, 
 unless it be administered exactly in the mode prescribed by its 
 Founder, and for the purpose designed by him. [7] 
 
DEFINITION OF SACRAMENT. 525 
 
 Hence (1) the words of the institution must be uttered during 
 the administration of the ordinance, according to the direction 
 of the Founder, for, before that, the element is only an external, 
 simple, and inoperative object ; (2) it must be administered and 
 received in the manner prescribed by the Founder ; [8] and (3) it 
 must be administered only to those who already belong to the 
 Church, or to those who desire to be received into it through the 
 Sacrament. Finally, order requires that, except in extraordinary 
 cases, it be administered only by regular ministers of the Church. 
 [9] When all these things are observed in this sacred act, ac- 
 cording to the instruction of its Founder, then it is a Sacrament; 
 nor is the moral character or the internal intention of the admin- 
 istrator, [10] or the faith of the recipient, [11] necessary to con- 
 stitute the act a Sacrament; but still the good or evil effect of 
 the Sacrament depends on the faith or unbelief of the recipient, 
 just as in the case of the good or evil effect of the divine Word. 
 [12] The immediate design of the Sacrament, finally, is to im- 
 part saving grace to man, or to establish those in it who already 
 possess it. [13] At the same time, however, the Sacraments, as 
 they are administered only within the Church, serve as a mode 
 of recognizing those who partake of them as members of the 
 Church; they serve, likewise, to remind the recipieots of the 
 blessings of salvation that are imaged forth in them, to stimulate 
 those who have come together with this same purpose to new 
 mutual love, and excite them to cultivate that internal spiritual 
 life which is symbolically indicated in the Sacraments. [14] 
 
 [1] Br. (639): "Since, besides the Word of God, the Sacraments 
 also are means of regeneration, conversion, and renovation, and there- 
 fore of conferring, sealing, and increasing faith, we must also treat more 
 particularly of these." 
 
 [2] Quex. (IV, 73) : "God has added to the Word of the Gospel as 
 another communicative (dorinbv') means of salvation, the Sacraments, 
 which constitute the visible Word." Strictly speaking, there is but 
 one means of salvation, which is distinguished as the audible and visible 
 Word ; through both one and the same grace is imparted to man, at 
 one time through the mere Word, at another through the external and 
 visible element. 
 
 Chmn. (Ex. Trid., II, 35): " For God, in those things which per- 
 
526 MEANS OF GRACE. 
 
 tain to our salvation, is pleased to treat with us through certain means ; 
 he himself has ordained this use of them, and instituted the word of 
 Gospel promise, which sometimes is proposed to us absolutely by itself or 
 nakedly, and sometimes clothed or made visible by certain rites or Sacra- 
 ments appointed by him." The two means of salvation are thus distin- 
 guished only by the manner in which they operate on men. Ap. Conf. 
 (VII, 5) : "As the Word enters the ear that it may reach the heart, so 
 the external rite strikes the eye that it may move the heart." The 
 effect of both is the same. Ap. Conf., 1. c. : "The effect of the Word 
 and the rite is the same, as Augustine has forcibly expressed it, viz., a 
 Sacrament is a visible word, because the rite is presented to the eyes, 
 and is, as it were, a picture of the Word, signifying the same thing as 
 the Word. Wherefore, the effect of both is the same." Comp. below, 
 Note 13. 
 
 [3] Ap. Conf. (VII, 3) : " (The Sacraments are) rites commanded 
 by Christ, and to which is added the promise of grace." Ap. Conf. 
 (XII, 18) : "A Sacrament is a ceremony or work in which God holds 
 out to us that which the promise annexed to the rite offers." 
 
 Br. (650): "A Sacrament in general may be defined as an action 
 divinely appointed, through the grace of God, for Christ's sake, employ- 
 ing an external element cognizable by the senses, through which, ac- 
 companied by the words of the institution, there is conferred upon or 
 sealed unto men the grace of the Gospel for the remission of sins unto 
 eternal life." 
 
 Grh. (VIII, 328) : "A Sacrament is a sacred and solemn rite, divinely 
 instituted, by which God, through the ministry of man, dispenses heav- 
 enly gifts, under a visible and external element, through a certain word, 
 in order to offer, apply, and seal to those using them and believing, the 
 special promise of the Gospel concerning -the gratuitous remission of 
 sins." 
 
 Hutt. (Comp. Loc. Th., 221, 214) : "A Sacrament is a sacred ac- 
 tion, divinely instituted, consisting partly of an external element or sign, 
 and partly of a celestial object, by which God not only seals the prom- 
 ise of grace peculiar to the Gospel (». <?., of gratuitous reconciliation), 
 but also truly presents, through the external elements, to the individuals 
 using the sacrament, the celestial blessings promised in the institution 
 of each of them, and also savingly applies the same to those who be- 
 lieve." By the grace of the Gospel is understood " the applying grace 
 of the Holy Spirit, secured by the merit of Christ, and promised in the 
 Gospel, namely, grace that calls, illuminates, regenerates, etc." The 
 differences of these definitions, and the reason why we have quoted so 
 many of them, will appear in Note 6. 
 
THE TWO FACTORS OF A SACRAMENT. 527 
 
 [4] Grh. (VIII, 207): " We say that two things are absolutely re- 
 quisite to constitute a Sacrament, properly so called, viz., the Word and 
 the element, according to the well-known saying of Augustine : ' The 
 Word is added to the element, and it becomes a Sacrament.' This as- 
 sertion is based upon the very nature and aim of the Sacraments, since 
 the Sacraments are intended to present to the senses, in the garb of an 
 external element, that same thing that is preached in the Gospel mes- 
 sage, from which it readily follows that neither the Word without the 
 element, nor the element without the Word, constitutes the Sacrament. 
 By the Word is understood, first, the command and divine institution 
 through which the element, because thus appointed by God, is separated 
 from a common, and set apart for a sacramental use ; and, secondly, the 
 promise* peculiar to the Gospel, to be applied and sealed by the Sacra- 
 ment. By the element is meant not any arbitrarily chosen element, 
 but that which has been fixed and mentioned in the words of the insti- 
 tution." 
 
 [5] It is generally acknowledged that the question as to what sacred 
 rites can be called Sacraments, cannot be decided merely by the signi- 
 fication of the word Sacrament, for this word has been somewhat arbi- 
 trarily used to designate both these sacred rites. According to its 
 etymology, it is derived from sacrare (Varro, Book IV), and signifies 
 every consecrated thing, hence the money deposited by contending par- 
 ties with the priest, " to the end that he who gained the suit should 
 receive his own, and he who lost it should have his money confiscated ;" 
 and also an oath, particularly that of soldiers, by which they consecrated 
 themselves to death if they proved unfaithful. The Vulgate translates 
 the Greek word fivar^pwv by sacramentum. But Tertullian first uses the 
 word in relation to Baptism in the sense of jur amentum. Accordingly, 
 in the language of the Church, there is a threefold meaning of the word 
 Sacrament. Quex. (IV, 73) : " The word Sacrament is understood 
 (1) in a very general sense, for any hidden or secret thing. Thus, the 
 incarnation of Christ, 1 Tim. 3: 16; the union of Christ and the 
 Church, Eph. 5 : 32; the calling of the Gentiles, Eph. 3 : 3, etc., are 
 called fjLvorripia, which the old Latin interpreter translated sacramenta. 
 Thus also the Fathers called every mystery and every sacred doctrine 
 that was not very plain a Sacrament, as the Sacrament of the Trinity, 
 the Sacrament of the incarnation and of faith. (2) It is understood in 
 a special sense, for the external sign of a sacred and heavenly object, 
 thus seed, grain, pearls, are the Sacraments or signs of the kingdom of 
 heaven, Matt. 13 : 24, etc. (3) In a very particular sense, for the 
 solemn action instituted, prescribed, and commanded by God, in which, 
 
528 MEANS OF GRACE. 
 
 by an external and visible sign, invisible benefits are graciously offered, 
 conferred, and sealed." We cannot then determine from the meaning 
 of the word Sacrament per se, what sacred services are to rank as Sac- 
 rame?its, but the marks which belong to the two services by common 
 consent designated as Sacraments, Baptism and the Lord's Supper, are 
 examined, and all other rites are excluded from this conception of a 
 Sacrament which do not present similar marks. In doing this, it is not 
 affirmed that the idea of a Sacrament per se does not belong to them, 
 but it is maintained that it is not applicable to them in the same sense 
 as to the two genuine Sacraments. Chmn. (Ex. Cone. Trid., II, 14): 
 " We will not contend about the definitions of this or that man, of the 
 ancients or the moderns, but we shall assume the ground which is be- 
 yond controversy, and acknowledged among all. Baptism and the 
 Eucharist are confessed by all to be truly and properly Sacraments." 
 Br. (641): "Thus, therefore, from the commonly received conceptions 
 of the marks in which those rites agree that are undoubtedly Sacra- 
 ments, it is apparent that those which may perchance be called Sacra- 
 ments, but have not these common requisites, are not Sacraments in the 
 same sense and reality as those which are properly so called, but are 
 only equivocally designated as such." 
 
 According to this canon, the doctrine of seven Sacraments, held by 
 the Church of Rome, is rejected. Luther, as early as his Larger 
 Catechism (1529) retains only two, but the Apol. still retains three 
 (VII, 4): "Therefore these are truly Sacraments, viz., Baptism, the 
 Lord's Supper, and Absolution, which is the Sacrament of penitence." 
 And Mel. (Loc. c. Th., I, 307) is inclined to regard ordination also as 
 a Sacrament: "I add also ordination, as they call it, i. e., the vocation 
 to the gospel ministry and the public approbation of that call, for all 
 these are commanded in the Gospel." From this it is plain that in the 
 early period of the Reformation there was still some hesitation about 
 the number of the Sacraments, which is explained from the fact that 
 both absolution and ordination possess some of the marks which we find 
 in Baptism and the Lord's Supper. Chmn. (Ex. Cone. Trid., II, 14) 
 thus explains himself on absolution : "Our theologians have often said 
 that they would not contend, but willingly grant that absolution should 
 be ranked among the Sacraments, because it has the application of a 
 general promise to the individuals using this service. But still it is 
 certain that absolution has not an established external element, or sign 
 or rite instituted or commanded of God. And although the imposition 
 of hands or some other external rite may be applied, yet it is certainly 
 destitute of a special and express divine command. Nor is there any 
 
REQUISITES OF A SACRAMENT. 529 
 
 promise that through any such external rite God will efficaciously apply 
 the promise of the Gospel. We have, indeed, the promise that through 
 the Word he wishes to be efficacious in believers; but in order to con- 
 stitute anything a Sacrament, not only is a naked promise in the Word 
 required, but that, by a divine appointment or institution, it be ex- 
 pressly clothed with some sign or rite divinely commanded. But the 
 announcement or recitation of the Gospel promise is not such a sign, 
 for in that way the general preaching of the Gospel would be a Sacra- 
 ment. . . . Therefore absolution is not properly and truly a Sacrament 
 in the way or sense in which Baptism and the Lord's Supper are Sacra- 
 ments ; but if any one, with this explanation and difference added, would 
 wish to call it a Sacrament on account of the peculiar application of the 
 promise, the Apology of the Augsburg Confession declares that it would 
 not oppose the idea." 
 
 Chmn. (Ex. Trid., II, 14) treats it most extensively: "Any ordi- 
 nance that is to be properly regarded as a Sacrament of the New Testa- 
 ment must have the following requisites: (1) It must have an external, 
 or corporeal and visible, element or sign, which may be handled, ex- 
 hibited, and used in a certain external rite. (2) The element or sign, 
 and the rite in which it is employed, must have an express divine com- 
 mand to authorize and sanction it. (3) It must be commanded and 
 instituted in the New Testament. (4) It must be instituted not for a 
 certain period or generation, but to be in force until the end of the 
 world. (5) There must be a divine promise of grace as the effect or 
 fruit of the Sacrament. (6) That promise must not only simply and 
 by itself have the testimony of God's Word, but it must by the divine 
 ordinance be annexed to the sign of the Sacrament, and, as it were, 
 clothed with that sign or element. (7) That promise must not relate 
 to the general gifts of God, whether corporeal or spiritual, but it must 
 be a promise of grace or justification, i. e., of gratuitous reconciliation, 
 the remission of sins, and, in a word, of all the benefits of redemption. 
 (8) And that promise, in the Sacraments, is either signified or an- 
 nounced not in general only, but on the authority of God is offered, pre- 
 sented, applied, and sealed to the individuals who use the Sacraments 
 in faith." 
 
 The later theologians say : " There is required for a Sacrament (1) 
 that it must be an action commanded by God; (2) it must have a visible 
 element divinely prescribed (united with the celestial object through the 
 medium of the words of the institution (Holl., 1054) ) ; (3) it must 
 have the promise of evangelical grace." 
 
 [6] By this the early Dogmaticians mean as yet nothing more than 
 
530 MEANS OF GRACE. 
 
 that the element thus consecrated by the Word must not be regarded as 
 ordinary or common, hence Hfrffr. cites as the substantial of a Sece- 
 rnent, the element and the Word, and in this sense Luther also appears to 
 have taken it, when in Cat. Maj. (IV, 17) he says of Baptism: "It is 
 not mere natural or common, but divine, celestial, sacred, and saving 
 water . . . and this just for the sake of the Word, which is the divine 
 and sacred Word." But the later Dogmaticians unite another sense to 
 it. (See the history of the origin of the later modes of expression in 
 Br., p. 670, who proves that occasion for a different mode of expression 
 was for the first time given at the Mompelgard Colloquy (1586) in con- 
 sequence of the controversy which there arose between Beza, on the 
 one side, and Jacob Andreas and Luke Osiander on the other.) They 
 distinguish, for instance, in a Sacrament, " a twofold material, a terres- 
 trial and a celestial, and they understand by the former the element or 
 external symbol, which is the corporeal visible object , . . ordained to 
 the end that it might be the vehicle and exhibitive medium of the celes- 
 tial object (water in Baptism, bread and wine in the Lord's Supper). 
 By the latter they understand an invisible and intelligible object (pre- 
 sented in an earthly object, as the divinely instituted medium), on which 
 the effect of the Sacrament principally depends;" yet they remark that 
 for the latter the word materia or matter is not an adequate one (since 
 the Sacrament is not a corporeal substance, it is plain that it does not 
 consist of matter properly so called; yet analogically matter is ascribed 
 to that with which the Sacrament is employed.) (Holl., 1059.) They 
 mean, then, that the terrestrial material is the vehicle of something 
 more exalted and divine, which is imparted through the medium of the 
 external element. What this divine thing is, we learn in each Sacra- 
 ment, for it is different in both. 
 
 Quen. (IV, 75) : " But what that is which comes in each sacrament 
 under the name of res ccelestis, can and should be known in its proper 
 place, i. e., from the words of the institution of each Sacrament." This 
 materia ccelestis is not in their opinion identical with the grace of the 
 Gospel ; hence, they do not (as in the passages above referred to in Cat. 
 Maj. and Hfrffr.) adopt as the essence of a Sacrament the Word and 
 element, but they still carefully distinguish the Word from the materia 
 ccelestis, and hold that the latter is imparted by the word of consecration. 
 (Hutt. (Loc. c, 597) : " The Word is never sacramentally joined 
 either with the terrestrial or the celestial part ; and, hence it does not 
 enter into the substance of the Sacrament. Therefore, the Word can- 
 not be called either the material or the form of the sacrament. . . . 
 Thus I say, that this Word is the effective cause (alnog woi^TiKdi), i. e., it 
 
RELATION OF THE HEAVENLY AND EARTHLY OBJECTS. 531 
 
 causes that these two essential parts constitute one Sacrament in the use 
 of the Sacraments.") Neither do they regard the materia ccelestis as 
 identical with evangelical grace, which the earlier Dogmaticians also 
 
 Co 7 o 
 
 teach is conferred through the Sacrament, but they believe that that 
 grace is conveyed only through the medium of the materia ccelestis. 
 While the earlier Dogmaticians only maintain that, with the word of 
 consecration, the external element ceases to be a common and external 
 one, without distinguishing the imparted divine material as something 
 separate from the Word, the later theologians regard the two as distinct. 
 It is easy to understand how they were led to this conclusion. In the 
 Lord's Supper, namely, the body and blood of Christ are communicated ; 
 there is, therefore, through the word of consecration, something added 
 and brought to man which is as different from the Word as it is from 
 saving grace. Something corresponding to this they think must be as- 
 sumed in regard to Baptism also, and in both cases they designate it as 
 a celestial material. 
 
 When we compare the views of the earlier Dogmaticians with those 
 of the more modern, we find their difference to consist in this, that the 
 earlier Dogmaticians are solely concerned to prove the analogy of the 
 Word and Sacraments as the two means of salvation, according to which 
 in the one case, evangelical grace is communicated by the Word, and in 
 the other by the external visible sign. In this view, however, there is 
 no notice taken of the fact, that, above all, in the Lord's Supper, be- 
 sides grace, there is something in addition present and csijnmunicated, 
 viz., the body and blood of Christ. The later theologians, on the other 
 hand, keep this particularly in view, that even if by the Sacraments, as 
 well as by the Word, the grace of salvation (i. e., conversion, justifica- 
 tion, regeneration, etc.) be conferred, yet that this grace is not the first 
 and proximate object conferred in the Sacraments, as it is in the Word, 
 but that in the Sacraments there is something else which precedes it (in 
 the Lord's Supper, body and blood), the design of which is to impart 
 saving grace. It is this, then, that they mean to convey by the general 
 expression, materia ccelestis, applicable to both Sacraments, but it is diffi- 
 cult for them to show the materia ccelestis in Baptism in the same way 
 as in the Lord's Supper. And, in this view of the subject, the force of 
 the analogy also between a Sacrament and the Word as the two means 
 of salvation, is weakened. In assuming a materia ccelestis, they assumed 
 also a particular union of the materia ccelestis et terrestris. 
 
 Qcen. (IV, 75): " As a sacrament is composed of a terrestrial and a 
 celestial object, there must necessarily be a certain union and Kotvuvla 
 which we properly call sacramental. For that union is neither essential, 
 
532 MEANS OF GRACE. 
 
 nor natural, nor accidental, but in view of the material united, it is ex- 
 traordinary ; in regard to the design, it is sacramental. Therefore, one 
 does not exist without the other, for instance, water without the Spirit, 
 nor the Spirit without water, because these two are most intimately 
 united in the sacramental act, nor can one be a Sacrament without the 
 other." This method of developing the doctrine, which from the times 
 of Grh. was generally adopted, though with many diversities of state- 
 ment as to what constitutes the celestial material in Baptism, was op- 
 posed only by Br. and several other theologians of Jena. As, namely, 
 the celestial material, which has to be assumed in Baptism, is altogether 
 different from that which is found in the Lord's Supper ; inasmuch, also, 
 as the union of the material and the element in the two Sacraments is 
 very different; and, finally, inasmuch as those who hold this doctrine 
 neither agree as to what is meant by this celestial material, nor use the 
 term celestial material [in the case of Baptism] in the same literal sense 
 as in the case of the Lord's Supper ; therefore, Br. contends that the 
 expression, celestial material, should be entirely ignored in the doctrine 
 of the Sacraments in general, and we should adhere to the simple doc- 
 trine of the earlier Dogmaticians, who do not mention it at all. He 
 speaks, therefore, only of a terrestrial material (644) : " By the mate- 
 rial of a Sacrament two things are meant ; first, an external and visible 
 element; secondly, an action performed with the element {e.g., washing, 
 distributing, etc.) (645). As to what some call the other part of the 
 Sacrament (i. <?., the words of the institution), . . . viz., the celestial 
 and invisible material of the Sacrament, it must be acknowledged, that 
 this is rather the form or formal part of the Sacrament, than the mate- 
 rial. And when some understand, that by the name celestial material 
 something else is signified, relatively opposed to the element as a sign, 
 but not the fruit itself of the Sacrament, but that upon which the ope- 
 ration and fruit of the Sacrament depend ; they nevertheless confess that 
 this same thing which they call the celestial material is sometimes, in- 
 deed, not even really present. But it is difficult to consider anything 
 as the material, and therefore an essential part of a Sacrament, which, 
 when the Sacrament exists, does not for this reason then itself exist. 
 Otherwise, also, if that be indeed present, which is regarded as the 
 celestial material, yet some again maintain, that from the presence to 
 the material is not a valid inference ; but that it is required, that what 
 can be called material must be present after the manner of a material. 
 They do not even explain sufficiently what it is to be present after the 
 manner of a material in a Sacrament, so far as the Sacraments in gen- 
 eral are concerned; but what it is to be thus present in the individual 
 
THE SACRAMENTAL ACTION. 533 
 
 Sacrament, they leave to be learned from the institution of each. 
 Whence }'ou may infer that the celestial material of a Sacrament in gen- 
 eral cannot be known, unless this knowledge be drawn from the Sacra- 
 ments individually. And, since in the Lord's Supper the body and 
 blood of Christ are called the celestial material, . . .it will be con- 
 fessed that the celestial material is not in the same way present in all 
 the Sacraments. Therefore, most especially if, when we are treating 
 of Sacraments in general, we assume a celestial material, the term 
 must be taken in so wide a sense, that one thing will not be, after the 
 manner of a material, in one Sacrament, just in the same way as an- 
 other thing is, after the manner of a material, in the other Sacrament. 
 Whence it further follows, that there is something, after the manner of 
 a material, present in one Sacrament literally, and in the other figura- 
 tively." 
 
 [7] Hfrffr. (465) : " It is especially required that in each Sacra- 
 ment, the whole action, as instituted aud ordained by Christ, should be 
 observed ; neither is the use of the Sacraments to be applied to foreign 
 ends and objects. Hence the rule : ' Nothing has the authority or na- 
 ture of a Sacrament beyond the application and action instituted by 
 Christ.' For example, if the water of Baptism be employed for the 
 baptism of bells, or for the cure of leprosy ; or when the consecrated 
 bread is not distributed and taken, but is either stored away in the pyx, 
 or offered in sacrifice, or carried about in processions, this is not the use, 
 ut the abuse and profanation of the Sacraments." 
 
 [8] Holl. (1060) : "The form of a Sacrament is the external action 
 (and that entirely occupied about the terrestrial and celestial part of 
 each Sacrament), which is constituted of three formal observances, im- 
 mediately following each other : (1) The recitation of the words of the 
 institution (consecration). (2) The sacramental dispensation (Sdaig). 
 (3) The reception of the Sacrament Q-vfts)." 
 
 1. " The consecration, i. e., the separation from a common to a sacred 
 use, which is made by reciting and pronouncing the words of the insti- 
 tution." Grh. (VIII, 240): "The consecration is not, (1) a mere 
 recitation of the words of the institution directed only to the hearers, (2) 
 nor is the change of symbols, which consecration effects, a mere change 
 of names, a significative analogy, a representation of an absent celestial 
 thing, . . . but it is a sacred and efficacious action, by which the sac- 
 ramental symbols are truly sanctified, i. e., separated from a common 
 and set apart for a sacramental use. But there is no (a) magical or 
 superstitious action dependent on the dignity or quality of the person, 
 i. e., on the power and character of the minister, who renders the Sac- 
 
 
534 MEANS OF GRACE. 
 
 rament valid by the force of his intention ; nor (b) is it to be thought 
 that there is a certain occult subjective power in the sound or number of 
 words, by which the consecration is accomplished; (c) nor that by it the 
 external elements are essentially changed and transubstantiated into the 
 heavenly object; but the presence of the heavenly, and its union with the 
 earthly object, depend altogether upon the institution, command and 
 will of Christ, and upon the efficacy of the original institution continu- 
 ing in the Church even until the present day, which the minister, or 
 rather Christ himself by the voice of the minister, continually repeats. 
 The minister, therefore, in the consecration, (1) repeats the primitive 
 institution of the Sacrament according to the command of Christ : 'Do 
 this,' etc., etc.; (2) he testifies that he does this not of his own accord, 
 nor celebrates a human ordinance, but, as the divinely appointed steward 
 of the mysteries, he administers the venerable Sacrament in the name, 
 authority, and place of Christ ; (3) he invokes the name of the true 
 God, that it may please him to be efficacious in this Sacrament accord- 
 ing to his ordinance, institution, and promise; (4) he separates the ex- 
 ternal elements from all other uses to a sacramental use, that they may 
 be organs and means by which celestial benefits may be dispensed. , ' 
 
 2. As to the distribution: " We must distinguish between the thing 
 itself and its mode; between the 66atg and m>tg themselves (the giving 
 and receiving) and the 66aeug nat Irjipeog rpoirog (the manner of giving and 
 receiving); the 66aig nat ^fjtptg, i. e., the administration, dispensation, pre- 
 sentatation, and reception of the Sacrament are essential, nor do they 
 allow of any exception ; but the mode of the administration and reception 
 admits of some liberty and variation. A few examples will render it 
 more plain. In Baptism it is absolutely necessary that a person should 
 be baptized with water, i. e., washed in the name of the Father, Son, 
 and Holy Spirit ; but it is no matter whether this ablution be performed 
 by immersion into water or by affusion with water." Holl. (1057): 
 '' The Church cannot change anything in the substantials of the Sacra- 
 ments, yet she rejoices in the liberty of making some change in the cir- 
 cumstantials." 
 
 [9] Holl. (1056): " God has intrusted the right of dispensing the 
 Sacraments to the Church, which commits the execution or exercise of 
 this right, for the sake of order and propriety, to the called and ordained 
 ministers of the gospel. But in case of extreme necessity, where the 
 Sacrament is necessary and could not be omitted without peril of salva- 
 tion, any Christian, whether layman or woman, may validly adminis- 
 ter the Sacrament of Baptism or initiation. 1 Pet. 2:9; Rev. 1 : 6." 
 \_Nothtaufe, Jachtaufe.~] 
 
EX OPERE OPERATO EFFICACY REJECTED. 535 
 
 [10] Ap. Conf. (IV, 47): "The Sacraments are efficacious, even if 
 they be administered by wicked ministers, because the ministers officiate 
 in the stead of Christ and do not represent their own person." 
 
 Quen. (IV, 74) : " The sacraments do not belong to the man who 
 dispenses them, but to God, in whose name they are dispensed, and 
 therefore the gracious efficacy and operation of the Sacrament depend 
 on God alone, 1 Cor. 3 : 5, and not on the character or quality of the 
 minister. The dispute about the intention of the minister is more intri- 
 cate. Propriety requires that he who administers the Sacraments should 
 bring to the altar a good intention of performing what God has com- 
 manded and instituted : a mind not wandering but collected and fixed. 
 It is absolutely necessary that the intention of Christ be observed in the ex- 
 ternal act. I say in the external act, for the intention of the minister to 
 perform the internal act is not necessary ; that is performed by the church. 
 On the other hand, the Church of Rome teaches that the intention of the 
 minister is necessary to the integrity, verity, and efficacy of the Sacra- 
 ment ; that this intention has respect not only to the external act of ad- 
 ministering the Sacrament according to the form of the institution, but 
 to the design and effect of the Sacrament itself. Thus the Council of 
 Trent : ' If any one declare that the intention of doing what the Church 
 does is not required in the ministers, while they dispense the Sacra- 
 ments, let him be anathema' " (78). 
 
 [11] Form. Conc. (Sol. Dec, VII, 24) : "We thus conclude and 
 declare that even if a bad and vicious man should take or distribute the 
 Lord's Supper, he yet takes the true Sacrament, i. e., the body and blood 
 of Christ, not less than the man who takes or distributes it in the most 
 worthy manner. For this Sacrament is not founded on the holiness of 
 man, but on the Word of God . . . 27 . . . It is conclusively demon- 
 strated that this presence is to be understood not only of the eating by 
 believing and worthy persons, but also by the unbelieving and un- 
 worthy." 
 
 Holl. (1061) : " Faith is not required to the substantial integrity of 
 a Sacrament (just as the Word of God, which hypocrites hear, is the 
 true Word, so also that is a Sacrament which adult hypocrites, destitute 
 of faith, receive)." 
 
 [12] The Evangelical Church herewith most distinctly opposes the 
 Romish doctrine ot the efficacy of the Sacrament ex opere operato. (Ap. 
 Conf. VII, 18): "We condemn the whole crowd of Scholastics, who 
 teach that the Sacraments confer grace on him who places no hinderance 
 in the way, ex opere operato, even though there be no good impulse in 
 the recipient. This is plainly a Jewish notion, to suppose that we are 
 
536 MEANS OF GRACE. 
 
 justified by a mere ceremony or external work, without any good im- 
 pulse of the heart, ?'. e., without faith. . . . We teach that faith is ne- 
 cessary to the proper use of the Sacraments : a faith which believes the 
 promises and receives the things promised, which are here offered in the 
 Sacrament. And the reason of this is plain and undeniable. A prom- 
 ise is useless to us unless it be embraced by faith. But the Sacraments 
 are signs of the promises, therefore faith is necessary to their proper 
 use." 
 
 Chmn. (Ex. C. Trid., II, 36): " The instrumental cause in this doc- 
 trine is twofold : one is, as it were, the hand of God, by which, through 
 the Word and Sacraments, he offers, presents, applies, and seals the 
 benefits of redemption to believers. The other is, as it were, our hand, 
 by which we in faith ask, apprehend, and receive those things which 
 God offers and presents to us through the Word and Sacraments. The 
 efficacy of the Sacraments is not such as though through them God in- 
 fuses and impresses grace and salvation, also on the unbelieving or those 
 receiving it without faith." 
 
 Holl. (1061): "Faith is necessarily required in order to the recep- 
 tion of the salutary efficacy of the Sacrament." Id. (1064): "The 
 Sacraments confer no grace on adults, unless when offered they receive 
 it by true faith, which existed in their hearts previously. In infants, 
 the Holy Spirit kindles faith by the Sacrament of initiation, by which 
 infants receive the grace of the covenant." 
 
 [13] Holl. (1062) : " The primary design of the Sacraments is the 
 offering, conferring, applying, and sealing of Gospel grace." " Gospel 
 grace is offered to all who use the Sacraments ; it is conferred on those 
 who worthily use them ; it is applied and sealed to adult believers." 
 Hence the Sacraments are not merely significative signs but such as also 
 present and tender what they set forth, for this is included already in 
 the idea of a Sacrament as a means of salvation. When in the Sym- 
 bolical Books (Ap. Conf., V, 42, A. C, XIII) they are called "signs 
 and testimonies of the will of God toward us," they are such " not es- 
 sentially, as if their whole nature and essence were limited to signifying, 
 or as if the very nature of the earthly and the heavenly object in all the 
 Sacraments, were merely significative." (Grh., VIII, 213.) 
 
 Of the false views of the word Sacrament, Chmn. (Ex. C. Trid., 
 II, 33) says : " In our times some take too low a view of the Sacra- 
 ments. They hold that the Sacraments are nothing else than signs and 
 marks of the Christian profession, by which Christians are distinguished 
 from Jews and the heathen ; some have thought that the Sacraments 
 are only the symbols of Christian society, by which we may be excited 
 
RELATION OF THE WORD TO THE SACRAMENTS. 53T 
 
 and bound to the mutual performance of duties. . . . Others see noth- 
 ing else in the use of the Sacraments than mere allegories or represen- 
 tations of Christian mortification unto sin, regeneration, and quickening, 
 etc. . . . There are those who seem desirous of appearing to entertain 
 exalted views of the Sacraments, and yet teach that the Sacraments 
 are only signs of grace, offered and exhibited before, and irrespective of 
 the use of the Sacraments ; so that through the Sacraments God confers 
 and presents nothing to those who with faith use the Sacraments, but 
 that they are only the signs of grace which was offered before and in 
 another way. Allied to this is the opinion of those who think that the 
 use of the Sacraments is only by way of commemoration, to excite faith 
 which elsewhere and in another way, but not in the true use of the Sac- 
 raments, seeks and receives grace ; just as such commemoration can be 
 derived also from pictures." 
 
 Grh. (VIII, 215): "Those who follow Calvin hold to a twofold sig- 
 nification in the Sacraments : one by which the terrestrial object signi- 
 fies the absent celestial object ; the other, by which the entire Sacra- 
 ment signifies the spiritual grace." 
 
 Chmn. (II, 35) : " The Ap. Conf. correctly declares that the effect, 
 virtue or efficacy of the Word, and of the Sacraments which are the 
 seals of the promises, is the same. . . . As, therefore, the Gospel is 
 the power of God unto the salvation of every one that belie veth, not 
 because there is any magical force in the letters, syllables, or sound of 
 the words, but because it is the means, organ, or instrument by which 
 the Holy Spirit is efficacious, proposing, offering, presenting, distribut- 
 ing, and applying the merit of Christ and the grace of God to the sal- 
 vation of every one that believeth ; so also is power and efficacy at- 
 tributed to the Sacraments, not because saving grace is to be sought in 
 the Sacraments above and beyond the merit of Christ, the mercy of 
 the Father, and the efficacy of the Holy Spirit, but that the Sacraments 
 are instrumental causes in this way, that through these means or organs 
 the Father desires to present, bestow, and apply his grace, the Son to 
 communicate his merit to believers, and the Holy Spirit to exercise his 
 efficacy for the salvation of every one that believeth. As, according to 
 this, the Sacraments effect the same grace as the Word, the question 
 may arise, Why has God employed a twofold means to this end? 
 Chmn. (Ex. C. Trid., II, 29) answers : " To such attacks and to the 
 clamors of fanatics, we properly reply from the Word of God, that the 
 Sacraments which God has instituted to be aids to our salvation, can in 
 no way be considered either useless or superfluous, or be safely neglected 
 and despised. . . . And, indeed, (as Chrysostom says) if we were 
 35 
 
538 MEANS OF GRACE. 
 
 angels, we would need no external sign ; but our carnal infirmity 
 hinders, disturbs, distracts, and weakens our faith. For it is hard to 
 continue firmly persuaded of those things proposed in the Word which 
 are not apparent to the senses. . . . Moreover faith, when it determines 
 that the divine promise is true, in general, is yet principally concerned 
 about the question, does this promise belong to me individually? . . . 
 God, therefore, who is rich in mercy . . . desires to present his grace to us 
 not only in one tvay, that is, by his mere Word, but he desires also to help 
 our infirmity by certain aids, namely, by Sacraments instituted and an- 
 nexed to the promise of the gospel, i. e., by certain signs, rites, or cere- 
 monies obvious to the senses, that by them he might admonish, instruct, 
 and make us sure that what we see performed in a visible manner, ex- 
 ternally, is effected internally in us by the power of God." 
 
 "In this way the Sacraments are, in respect to us, signs confirm- 
 ing our faith in the promise of the Gospel ; in respect to God, they are 
 organs or instruments, through which God in the Word presents, ap- 
 plies, seals, confirms, increases, and preserves the grace of the Gos- 
 pel promise in believers. The grace tendered in the Word is not different 
 from that tendered in the Sacraments ; the promise in the Gospel is not 
 different from that in the Sacraments ; but the grace is the same and 
 the Word one and the same, except that in the Sacraments the Word is 
 rendered visible, as it were, on account of our infirmity, by signs di- 
 vinely appointed." The question of the necessity of the Sacraments is 
 thus decided by Chmn. (Ex. C. Trid., II, 30) : " The Sacraments are 
 necessary both by reason of the infirmity of our faith, which needs aids 
 of this kind, and by reason of the divine institution. . . . And in this 
 sense we not unwillingly grant that the Sacraments are necessary to 
 salvation, as the instrumental cause ; but yet this declaration is to be 
 added, that the necessity of the Sacraments to salvation is not so precise 
 as that of faith and the Word. . . . But if any one have true faith in 
 Christ from hearing the Word, and if the ability to use the Sacraments 
 according to the divine institution be not conceded him, in such a case 
 surely the necessity of the Sacraments to salvation is not to be consid- 
 ered as absolute; for then salvation would be denied to those who have 
 no ability to use the Sacraments, although they embrace Christ as their 
 Saviour by faith in the Word." 
 
 Holl. (1065): "The Sacraments are necessary by the necessity of 
 the precept and the means. They have no absolute, but an ordinate or 
 conditionate necessity." Quen. (IV, 77): "Baptism is necessary in in- 
 fants, not only by the necessity of the precept, but by the necessity of 
 the means, because there is no other means by which they may be re- 
 
SACRAMENTS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 539 
 
 generated ; but in adults it is necessary by reason of the precept, be- 
 cause in that case it requires faith. The Eucharist is necessary to all 
 Christian adults by the necessity of the precept." 
 
 [14] Holl. (1062) : " The secondary designs of the Sacraments are: 
 («) That they may be marks of the Church, by which it is distinguished 
 from unbelievers," ("and symbols of confession by which we separate 
 ourselves from other sects." Quex., IV., 77). " (h) That they may 
 be monuments of the benefits of Christ. Luke 22: 19. (c) That they 
 may be bonds of love and the nerves of public assemblies. Eph. 4:5; 
 1 Cor. 10: 17. (d) That they may be incitements to the exercise of 
 the virtues (Baptism signifies the burying of the old Adam, Rom. 6:4; 
 the Lord's Supper excites us to a grateful remembrance of the death of 
 Christ, 1 Cor. 11 : 26)." 
 
 Observation As the Old Testament also contains the Word of God 
 
 as a means of salvation, the Dogmaticians hold also that there are Sac- 
 raments in it, and regard as such circumcision and the passover, the 
 types of Baptism and the Lord's Supper. Ohmn. (Ex. C. Trid., II, 
 18) : " God, in all ages of the world, by giving a certain Word, re- 
 vealed his will concerning the mystery of redemption to the human 
 race, concerning the gratuitous reconciliation and acceptance of believers 
 to life eternal through faith, because of the sacrifice of his Son as Med- 
 iator. He also added to the Word, by his own divine institution, certain 
 external signs, by which to seal and confirm more clearly the promise 
 of righteousness by faith. The institution and use of Sacraments did 
 not, therefore, first begin in the time of the New Testament ; but the 
 fathers in the time of the Old Testament, even before the publication of 
 the Law, had their certain signs or Sacraments divinely instituted for 
 this use, which were the seals of the righteousness of faith. Rom. 4. 
 But though it is the same God, the same Mediator, the same grace, 
 righteousness, promise, faith, salvation, etc., yet those external signs or 
 seals are sometimes changed for others, substituted in their place by di- 
 vine institution, so that the mode of revelation was constantly rendered 
 more clear, which at first was like a lamp shining in a dark place; after- 
 wards the morning star succeeded, until at length, the night being past, 
 the Sun of righteousness arose." On the relation of the Sacraments of 
 the Old Testament and the New, Quex. (IV, 84) says: "By the Sac- 
 raments of the New Testament, the grace of Christ is more clearly, 
 fully, perfectly, and abundantly dispensed to believers; but from this it 
 does not follow, as the Romanists maintain, that by the Sacraments of 
 the Old Testament divine grace and the remission of sins were not 
 clearly presented nor conferred on believers. For now the work of re- 
 
540 MEANS OF GRACE. 
 
 demption being consummated, truth succeeds to figures, substance to 
 shadows." [Ger. IX, 4: "In those of the New Testament, the present 
 Christ is tendered and given; in those of the Old Testament, he was 
 signified and prefigured."] 
 
 § 54. Of Baptism. 
 
 Of the two Sacraments, Baptism precedes the Lord's Sup- 
 per. [1] We are to treat of the nature of Baptism, the form in 
 which it is to be administered, and the design of its institution. 
 
 1. Baptism is an act enjoined by the Lord, and accompanied 
 with a promise, Matt. 28: 19. Hence we have in Baptism not 
 merely" water, and not common water, but also the Word of God. 
 But there is superadded to this a higher efficacy than exists in 
 mere natural water, [2] and it is this which, by means of the 
 water, effects saving grace. [3] 
 
 2. But if we expect such a result from Baptism, it must be ad- 
 ministered precisely according to the instructions of the Lord. 
 The consecration must be according to his will, and the act itself 
 administered to the baptized person agreeably to the prescribed 
 mode. [4] If all this be done, then the Baptism is to be regarded 
 as valid, whether the officiating minister be a believer or not, 
 or whether the person baptized believe in the Sacrament or 
 not. [5] 
 
 3. The immediate design of Baptism is, finally, to work sav- 
 ing grace in man. [6] But, as also the Word of God has the like 
 effect, Baptism is intended to produce this result only in such, 
 cases in which it is applied at an earlier period than the Word; 
 this is the case with infants who are not yet susceptible to the 
 preaching of the Gospel. [7] But in adults who, with their 
 already developed reason, can understand the preaching of the 
 Gospel, the Word has precedence, and produces its results before 
 the Sacrament. But, in such instances, Baptism serves to seal 
 and establish the gracious result already accomplished by the 
 Word. [8] Hence in the case of adults, who are yet to be bap- 
 tized, faith must be demanded as the condition on which the or- 
 dinance effects this blessed end. [9] This cannot be expected of 
 infants; but it does not follow that they are for that reason to be 
 deprived of Baptism, for they need grace as well as adults, and 
 
NECESSITY OF BAPTISM. 541 
 
 are invited to it by God. It is, therefore, God's will that they 
 be baptized, and Baptism serves also to create in them this 
 faith. [10] The efficacy of Baptism is not limited to the moment 
 of its administration, but it continues to confer strength upon its 
 subject. Nor is this efficacy lost if, in its administration, the in- 
 tended result, because of some hinderance on man's part, be not 
 immediately produced ; for still, if the ordinance were properly 
 administered, a covenant has been entered into with God, and 
 thereby there is forever established a disposition on God's part 
 to produce the gracious effect to its full extent, when the indi- 
 vidual no longer strives against it. [11] At the same time, in re- 
 pentance man still has the means to appropriate to himself the 
 blessed efficacy of Baptism, of which he has hitherto by his own 
 neglect been deprived ; for repentance is nothing else than a con- 
 tinuation or renewal of that which was symbolically indicated in 
 Baptism, namely, crucifving the old man within us, so that in 
 repentance we can recover that which was neglected on man's 
 part in Baptism. [12] On this ground, also, the repetition oi 
 Baptism is as unnecessary as it is inadmissible. [13] 
 
 Finally, Baptism is necessary, because it is commanded by 
 God ; but, as God can save us through other means also, we hope 
 that the children of Christian parents who, without their own 
 fault, are prevented from being baptized, will not be lost. [14] 
 
 As Baptism, at the same time, distinguishes us from the great 
 mass of those who do not belong to the Church, and imposes on 
 us the obligation to be faithful to our baptismal covenant, the fol- 
 lowing may be considered as secondary designs of Baptism: (1) 
 The distinction between Christians and Gentiles, and the union oi 
 the former with the Church, 1 Cor. 12 : 12. (2) The obligation 
 to true faith and a godly life, 1 Pet, 3 : 21. [15] 
 
 [1] Grh. (IX, 67) " The Sacrament of Baptism must be considered 
 first, as it precedes the Lord's Supper in (1) the time of its institution, 
 for it was divinely established in the very commencement of the New 
 Testament dispensation ; (2) in administration, for John and the disciples 
 of Christ baptized before the Lord's Supper was instituted ; (3) in order, 
 for Baptism is the first portal to grace; it is the Sacrament of initiation ; 
 the Lord's Supper is the Sacrament of confirmation ; by Baptism we are 
 regenerated ; by the Lord's Supper we are fed and nourished to eternal 
 
542 MEANS OF GRACE. 
 
 life. As therefore in nature, so also in grace, we must be born before 
 we are fed ; we must be begotten before we can grow. By Baptism we 
 are received into the covenant of God ; by the Lord's Supper we are 
 preserved in it. By Baptism faith and the other gifts of the Spirit are 
 excited in us; by the Lord's Supper they are increased and confirmed. 
 Baptism was prefigured by circumcision ; the Lord's Supper, by the 
 paschal lamb. No one can have access to the Lord's Supper unless he 
 have been baptized ; as in the Old Testament none but the circumcised 
 were permitted to eat the paschal lamb." 
 
 The Dogmaticians have extensively discussed the question, what re- 
 lation did John's Baptism sustain to that of Christ? Chmn. (Ex. C. 
 Trid., II, 66): "The same difference that exists between the word con- 
 cerning Christ to come, Christ coming, and Christ offered [to men in 
 the preaching of the Gospel], exists also between circumcision, the Bap- 
 tism of John, and the Baptism of Christ. But although as to the mode 
 of the publication of the doctrine concerning Christ there may be some 
 difference, yet as to its substance it has been the same and has had the 
 same effects on believers in every age. As it is then with the Word, 
 so also is it with circumcision, the Baptism of John, and of the apostles. 
 Nor are these to be too nicely discriminated. For if these subtleties be 
 allowed, in this way we can also establish the difference between the 
 Baptism performed by the apostles before the passion and resurrection 
 of Christ, and that which they administered afterwards." The ques- 
 tion, Whether it was necessary for those who were baptized by John to re- 
 ceive afterwards the Baptism of Christ ? Chmn. leaves undetermined. All 
 the Dogmaticians agree in not referring the words " fire and spirit," in 
 Matt. 3: 11, to actual Baptism, because Christ, Acts 1: 5, long after 
 Baptism was administered, refers their fulfilment to a later period; but 
 they understand them as relating to the effusion of the Holy Ghost on 
 Pentecost and the gifts of the Spirit connected with it. 
 
 [2] Cat. Maj. (IV, 14): "If you be asked, What is Baptism? an- 
 swer, that it is not mere water, but such as is comprehended and included 
 in the Word and command of God, and sanctified by them, so that it is 
 nothing else than a water of God, or a divine water; not that it is in 
 itself of more value than other water, but that God's Word and com- 
 mandment are added to it." (See Art. Smalcald, V, 2, 3.) The 
 earlier Dogmaticians were satisfied with this simple expression, and 
 hence designate, as the substance of the Sacrament, the external element 
 of water and the Word of the institution and promise. (Chmn. (Loc. c. 
 Th., Ill, 161): " The distinction is to be retained, viz., that the substance 
 of Baptism consists in the act and in the words, ' I baptize thee in the name 
 
THE HOLY SPIRIT IN BAPTISM. 543 
 
 of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.'") But the later 
 writers (see Of the Sacraments in General, note 6, p. 544 seq.) speak 
 of a double matter in Baptism, the earthly object, which is natural, 
 pure water, everywhere at hand, and the heavenly object, by which 
 they designate that which they suppose is superadded by the words of 
 the consecration. This most of them consider to be the whole Trinity, 
 others the Holy Spirit, and others the blood of Christ. These different 
 views arise from the fact that some of them regard the heavenly object as 
 indicated in the baptismal formula, others in John 3: 5, and others 
 again in 1 John 5 : 6. But there is as little contradiction in these dif- 
 ferent views of the heavenly object as there is in the passages just cited. 
 (Quex. (IV, 110): "The opinions of the orthodox on the heavenly 
 object are indeed diverse, but not contradictory, only subordinate.") 
 The sense in which the heavenly object is by some regarded as the 
 whole Trinity, by others as the Holy Spirit, and by others as the blood 
 of Christ, is thus explained by Grh. (concerning the presence of the 
 Trinity) (IX, 133 seq.) : "As the name of God is nothing else than 
 God himself, and the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is, ac- 
 cording to the institution of Christ, joined with the water of Baptism, 
 it hence follows that the whole Trinity is present by his grace in Bap- 
 tism, and by the water of Baptism is efficacious to the salvation of men ; 
 . . . therefore the other substantial part of Baptism is the name of 
 the whole adorable Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit ; that is, 
 the infinite majesty, the ineffable sanctity, the unspeakable goodness, 
 the admirable virtue and grace of the whole Trinity, which, with all 
 its virtue and the benefits of grace, are efficacious by water united to 
 and sanctified by the Word." (Concerning the presence of the Holy 
 Spirit): "As the Holy Spirit is the third person of the Trinity, and as 
 Baptism is administered not only in the name of the Father and the Son, 
 but also of the Holy Spirit, it follows that the Spirit acts efficaciously 
 in, with and by the water of Baptism, works faith, regeneration, and 
 renovation in those who do not strive against God, and seals the cove- 
 nant of grace in the hearts of the baptized. (The Holy Spirit is named 
 alone, because regeneration is attributed to him as his peculiar work. 
 He makes the water of Baptism a salutary means of regeneration, not 
 as though the other persons were excluded, for the works of the Trinity 
 ad extra are undivided, yet with the order and distinction of persons 
 preserved.) As the Holy Spirit was supernaturally and peculiarly 
 united with the dove in which he descended on Christ at his Baptism, 
 so even at the present day is he supernaturally and peculiarly united 
 with the water of Baptism." (Concerning the presence of the blood of 
 
544 MEANS OF GRACE. 
 
 Christ) : "As the Son of God in the fulness of time assumed true human 
 nature, and personally and inseparably united it to himself, it follows 
 that Christ is present in Baptism, not only according to his divine 
 nature, but also in his human nature, and hence that the blood of Christ 
 is by no means to be excluded from Baptism." But Grh. (IX, 137) 
 adds: "Although Christ the God-man is present in Baptism, and by 
 his blood, through the medium of faith, washes us from our sins, yet the 
 most distinguished theologians maintain that the blood of Christ cannot 
 very well be called the other material part of Baptism." The most of 
 the Dogmaticians agree in saying, "the heavenly object of Baptism is 
 analogically called the whole sacred Trinity, but peculiarly and termi- 
 natively the Holy Spirit. (Holl., 1085.)" Calov. (IX, 166) attempts 
 to combine the three expressions : " The heavenly object, considered as 
 a whole, is the most holy Trinity, namely, the Father, the Son of God 
 . . . (to whose entireness, not the divine nature alone, but also the 
 human nature contributes, as that to which alone also the blood belongs, 
 and of w T hich he became a partaker for our sake), and also the Holy 
 Spirit; and this [i. <?., the most holy Trinity] in one expression is called 
 the Word and the name of God, i. e., God himself, threefold and one, 
 Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, according to the well-known rule handed 
 down from Augustine: 'The Word is joined to the element and it be- 
 comes a Sacrament.' This Word of the institution is found in Matt. 
 28 : 19." The fluctuation of the Dogmaticians in these definitions is 
 also manifest in this, that some suppose the expression, "the heavenly 
 object is the whole Trinity," signifies nothing more than the other 
 earlier one, viz., "the second essential part [of Baptism] is the Word," 
 for, in the Word, God is included; while the others (Hutt., for in- 
 stance) expressly maintain that the Word is not a substantial part, but 
 only the active (ttoi^tikov) principle of Baptism, which, from this point 
 of view, appears the more correct; and it is from this diversity of views 
 that the difference in the expression of the earlier and later Dogmati- 
 cians, as noticed in the previous section, note 6, proceeds. The opposi- 
 tion of Br. to this mode of expression we have mentioned in the preced- 
 ing section. In relation to Baptism he says (683): "When it is ac- 
 knowledged (1) that the words of the institution, besides the water, 
 belong to the substance of Baptism ; and (2) from the force of these 
 words it is further acknowledged that the Holy Spirit and the whole 
 Trinity are the author of this Sacrament as a means of grace; and 
 when (3) it is acknowledged that the Holy Spirit and the triune 
 God, wherever and whenever Baptism is rightly administered, is present 
 in the same way, by virtue of his measureless essence : and (4) is pree- 
 
THE SACRAMENTAL UNION IN BAPTISM. 545 
 
 ent by his grace in such a manner that, being present, he not only seri- 
 ously offers spiritual benefits through this Sacrament, and (5) enters into 
 the covenant of grace, with the person baptized, never to be broken on 
 his part, and seals it through Baptism ; but also (6) in the person bap- 
 tized who does not resist the divine grace, accomplishes, in this act 
 itself, the work of regeneration and renovation through this Sacrament 
 in such a manner that, (7) not by a separate and peculiar action, but 
 jointly with the water of Baptism, and through it by one undivided ac- 
 tion, he enkindles and confirms faith ; and that (8) on account of the 
 merit of the God-man, Christ, truly present as to both natures, and on 
 account of his blood shed for our sins ; for, just as (9) since faith is con- 
 ferred by baptism, by this also the blood of Christ is sprinkled in the 
 same sense, as far as his merit is applied by faith. When, I say, these 
 things are acknowledged and maintained, we may well, as far as the 
 rest is concerned, with the more ancient theologians, be silent about the 
 name heavenly object and its almost inexplicable nature, and rather con- 
 fess a cautious ignorance than profess false knowledge." The assump- 
 tion of a heavenly object involves that of a " sacramental union, which 
 is the union of true water with the Holy Trinity, and therefore not only 
 with the Father, but also with the incarnate Son and with the Holy 
 Spirit. For, neither is the water given or received without the most 
 Holy Trinity, or without the Holy Spirit, nor the latter or the former 
 without the water; because these two are most closely united in the 
 sacramental act, nor can one be a Sacrament without the other. And 
 this union is not relative only, or figurative, or typical, such as it was in 
 the Sacraments of the Old Testament, but it tenders the celestial object, 
 and is really and truly present ; whence water, in its sacramental 
 form, is not to be regarded as mere water, but the laver of regeneration 
 in the Word, and as united with the most Holy Trinity in an ineffable 
 manner, John 3:5; Eph. 5 : 26 ; Titus 3 : 5 ; 1 Pet. 3 : 21 ; 1 John 
 1: 7." Quen. (IV, 112). 
 
 [3] Br. (693): " Baptism may be defined as a sacred action, insti- 
 tuted by Christ, by which men are washed with water, in the name of 
 the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, and are thus regenerated and renewed, 
 that they may secure eternal life." 
 
 Akt. Smalcald (V, 1): "Baptism is nothing else than the Word of 
 God with washing in water, according to his institution and command, 
 or, as Paul says, Eph. 5 : 26, the washing of water by the Word." 
 
 Holl. (1080): " Baptism is a sacred and solemn action, divinely in- 
 stituted, by which men, living and actually born,* without distinction of 
 
 *[This is in opposition to the baptism infantum nondurn in luccm editorum. See 
 Gerhard, IX. 209: " Those not yet born, cannot be born again."] 
 
546 MEANS OF GRACE. 
 
 sex and age, are washed in water in the name of the Father, Son, and 
 Holy Ghost, that by this washing of water divine grace, promised in 
 the Gospel, may be applied, conferred upon, and sealed to them." 
 
 [4] Grh. (IX, 137): " The form of Baptism consists in the action, 
 that is, in the mersion of the person baptized into water, or, what is just 
 as well, in the affusion of water, and in the recitation of the words of the 
 institution: i I baptize thee in the name of the Father,' etc.; so that there 
 are, in general, three substantial parts of Baptism to be maintained, 
 which cannot be separated or changed, viz., water, the Word, and the 
 action, which embraces mersion of the person into water, or the asper- 
 sion of water, and the recitation of the words of the institution. . . . 
 We do not ascribe to the external recitation of the Word any magical 
 or secret power, when we assert that there would be no Baptism unless 
 it be done in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost ; but by this 
 we teach and assert that it is incumbent on the true disciples of Christ 
 to adhere with godly simplicity to his Word, and observe his institution 
 with inviolable accuracy." 
 
 The signification of the words of the institution employed in the ad- 
 ministration of Baptism is thus explained by Grh. (IX, 132): " When 
 the officiating minister says, ' I baptize thee,' etc., the words are to be 
 taken in this sense : (1) That Baptism is not a ceremony devised by 
 man, but an ordinance of the true God, and a holy Sacrament di- 
 vinely instituted. . . . (2) That he does not administer this Sacrament 
 of his own private will, but in the place of God, the dispenser of whose 
 mysteries and whose minister he is. . . . (3) That on this water of 
 Baptism the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, the one true 
 God, is invoked, that in this action, commanded by him, he may be pres- 
 ent, according to his promise, and receive the baptized person into favor. 
 . . . (4) That the water of Baptism is no longer simply and merely 
 water, but such water through which the whole blessed Trinity desires to 
 be efficacious to the salvation of the subject baptized, and therefore 
 through which the Trinity, in this very action of the baptizing minister, 
 operates efficaciously according to his promise, ' I baptize thee,' etc., i. 
 e., I testify that by this Sacrament thou art received into the covenant of 
 grace, that the Father accepts thee as his child, that the Son washes 
 thee from thy sins in his blood and clothes thee with the garment of 
 righteousness, that the Holy Spirit regenerates and renews thee to eter- 
 nal life, so that in this way thou mayest become a child of God the 
 Father forever. . . . (5) That the person baptized, being thus received 
 by his Sacrament into the covenant of grace, is obligated to know the 
 one true God through his Word, to supplicate, worship, and serve him 
 alone." . . . 
 
USAGES OFTEN CONNECTED WITH BAPTISM. 547 
 
 To the act, as above described, there is added a series of ceremonies 
 and usages more or less important, all of which are, however, not essen- 
 tial to Baptism, but are intended only to render the act more solemn. 
 Grh. (IX, 308, seq.) specifies these as usual in our Church : " The 
 admonition concerning original sin [since John admonished those com- 
 ing to his baptism, of the fruitlessness of their lives, Matt. 3: 10], the 
 giving of the name [as in circumcision, Luke 1 : 59], the minor ex- 
 orcism, the sign of the cross ["to testify that the infant's reception into 
 grace occurs only by the merit of Christ crucified"], prayers [after our 
 Lord's example, Matt. 19: 14; Mark 10: 14], recitation of the Gospel, 
 the imposition of hands, recitation of the Lord's Prayer, the use of 
 sponsors." Here belongs also the renunciation of Satan ("by which 
 those who are to be baptized solemnly and in express words renounce 
 Satan and all his pomp"). Concerning exorcism, Gerhard (ib. 310) 
 says: "It is a testimony : 1. Of the spiritual captivity of infants in the 
 kingdom of Satan, because of sin. 2. Of the fact that the Messiah has 
 come, and of the redemption wrought by his work ; that the strong man 
 armed is overcome, and the spoils are distributed through Word and 
 Sacraments. 3. Of the divine efficacy belonging to baptism, whereby 
 infants are transferred from the power of darkness into the kingdom of 
 God's Sou. 4. Of the chief end of the ministerial office, consisting not 
 only in the application of the benefits of Christ to believers, but also in 
 unceasing warfare against Satan. 5. It is a public confession of the 
 Church against the errors of Pelagians, Anabaptists, Zwinglians. It is 
 approved by the testimonies of the primitive Church. But our exor- 
 cism differs from that of the Papists : 1. Ours rests on human author- 
 ity, and is an adiaphoron, and of free observance ; that of the Papists 
 pretends to rest on apostolic authority. 2. Ours is emblematic, signify- 
 ing original sin and deliverance therefrom by Christ ; to that of the 
 Papists efficacious operation is ascribed." Chmn. (Loc. c. Th., Ill, 
 161): " Those who omit or reject exorcism with the opinion of and for 
 the same reason as the Anabaptists and Sacramentarians, because they 
 think that infants either have no sins, and therefore are not by nature 
 the children of wrath, or under the power of Satan; or, although they 
 are born in sin, yet on account of their birth according to the flesh from 
 believing parents, even before Baptism and without Baptism, are not 
 out of the kingdom of heaven or under the power of darkness, indeed 
 deserve to be rebuked and blamed. . . . But if this doctrine of original 
 sin, of the power and kingdom of Satan and of the efficacy of Baptism, 
 be granted by an open confession, the substance, integrity, and efficacy 
 of Baptism are not dependent on that prescribed rite of the words of ex- 
 
548 MEANS OF GRACE. 
 
 orcism, but the Church has the liberty of propounding and explaining 
 that doctrine in other words more agreeable to the Scriptures." The 
 formula in the ancient Church was this : " I adjure thee, thou unclean 
 spirit, that thou come out of this servant of Jesus Christ, in the name of 
 the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost." Br. (692), however, observes: 
 "The words have, it is true, the form of a command, but they are to be 
 taken in the sense of a 'prayer to God, with confidence, and with innate 
 animosity hence begotten against the enemy to be expelled." 
 
 [5] Cat. Maj. (IV, 53): "If the Word is connected with the water, 
 Baptism must be regarded as proper and valid, even if faith be not con- 
 nected with it. For my faith does not constitute Baptism, but it receives 
 and apprehends it. Baptism is not vitiated or corrupted by men abus- 
 ing it or not properly receiving it, for it is not bound to our faith, but 
 to the Word of God." 
 
 The same is true with regard to the state of mind of the person who 
 adminsters it, and Baptism even by a heretic is not invalid. Holl. 
 (1084): " If Baptism be administered by a heretic, who retains the sub- 
 stantial of the ordinance, we must not doubt its efficacy. But if it may 
 be administered in a flourishing church, w T here an orthodox minister can 
 be procured, it is a great sin to ask it of a heretic. But in a church un- 
 der oppression, in a case of urgent necessity, it may be asked for and 
 received without blame from a heretic who uses the customary formula 
 of Baptism ; but then a protest must be added that the infant is not to 
 be bound by this Baptism to embrace false doctrine." Baptism by 
 others than ministers, in case of necessity (Noth-taufe), is also valid. 
 Holl. (1081) says : "Ordinarily, ministers of the Church, legitimately 
 called and ordained, orthodox and of a blameless life, administer Bap- 
 tism. Extrordinarily, however, and in case of necessity, any godly 
 Christian, skilled in sacred rites, whether male or female, can admin- 
 ister the ordinance." 
 
 [6] Cat. Maj. (IV, 24) : . . . " Hence, conceive of the whole 
 thing as simply as possible, namely, that the power, work, fruit, and end 
 of Baptism is to save men. . . . But to be saved, we know, is nothing 
 else than to be delivered from the tyranny of sin, death, and the devil, 
 to be transferred into the kingdom of Christ, and to dwell with him for- 
 ever." 
 
 Grh. (IX, 148, 157) : " As Baptism is not simply water, but water 
 comprehended in, sanctified by, and united to the Word of God, it is 
 not therefore used to wash away the impurity of the body, but it is a 
 divine and salutary means and organ by which the whole sacred Trin- 
 ity efficaciously operates for the salvation of man. Although the effects 
 
PRIMARY DESIGN OF BAPTISM. 549 
 
 of Baptism are various and multiform, yet, following the apostle, Tit. 3 : 
 5, we reduce them all to these two heads, that Baptism is the washing 
 of regeneration (John 3: 5), which embraces the gift of faith (Tit. 3: 5), 
 the remission of sins (Luke 3:3; Acts 2 : 38 ; 22 : 16 ; Rom. 6 : 3), 
 reception into the covenant of grace (1 Pet. 3 : 21), adoption as the 
 sons of God (Gal. 3 : 26), the putting on of Christ (Gal. 3 : 27), deliv- 
 erance from the power of Satan and the possession of eternal life (Col. 
 1: 13, 14; Mark 16: 16); and renewal (Tit. 3: 5), that is, the Holy 
 Spirit is given to him, who begins to renew the intellect, the will, and 
 all the powers of the soul, so that the lost image of God may begin to 
 be restored in him, that the inner man may be renewed (2 Cor. 4: 16) 
 that the old man may be put off, and the new one put on (Col. 3 : 10), 
 that the Spirit may oppose the flesh and rule over it, so that sin may 
 not obtain dominion in the body." 
 
 Holl., more generally (1095) : " The primary design of Baptism is 
 the offering, application, conferring, and sealing of evangelical grace." 
 Hfrffr. (497) : " The fruit or effect of Baptism is regeneration and 
 the remission of sins (John 3:5; Tit. 3:5; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:3; 
 Acts 2: 38; 22: 16; Eph. 5: 26), salvation and participation in all 
 the benefits of Christ, into whom we are ingrafted by Baptism (Tit. 3 : 
 5 ; 1 Pet. 3 : 21 : Rom. 6:3; Gal. 3 : 27 ; 1 Cor. 12 : 13), a good con- 
 science toward God, or the assurance of faith as to the forgiveness of 
 sins (1 Pet. 3 : 21 ; 2 Cor. 1 : 21), newness of life (Rom. 6:3; Col- 
 2: 11)." 
 
 In opposition to the assertion of the Papal Church, that "sin is de- 
 stroyed by Baptism, so that it no longer exists," the doctrine of the for- 
 giveness of sins by Baptism is thus more particularly defined : " The 
 guilt and dominion of sin is taken away by Baptism, but not the root or 
 incentive (fomes) of sin." (Holl., 1096) Ap. Conf. (I, 35) : 
 "(Luther) always thus wrote, that Baptism removes the guilt of orig- 
 inal sin, although the material of sin, as they call it, may remain, i. e., 
 concupiscence. He also affirmed of this material, that the Holy Spirit, 
 given by Baptism, begins to mortify concupiscence and creates new 
 emotions in man. Augustine speaks to the same effect when he says : 
 1 Sin is forgiven in Baptism, not that it does not exist, but that it is not 
 imputed.' " 
 
 [7] Grh. (IX, 236) : " There is no other ordinary means of regen- 
 eration than the Word and the Sacrament of Baptism. By the Word 
 infants cannot be influenced, but only adults, who have come to years of 
 discretion. It remains, therefore, that they are regenerated, cleansed 
 from the contagion of original sin, and made partakers of eternal life, 
 through Baptism" 
 
550 MEANS OF GRACE. 
 
 [8] Br. (690) : " But here, as regards the immediate design [of 
 Baptism] a diversity exists in respect to the different subjects. For 
 faith is at first conferred upon and sealed to all infants alike by Baptism, 
 and by this faith the merit of Christ is applied to them. But adults, 
 who receive faith from hearing the Word before their Baptism, are only 
 sealed and confirmed in their faith by it. (Examples, Acts 2 : 41 ; 8 : 
 12, 36-38; 16: 14, 15, 31, 33; 18: 8.) And not only now, when 
 Baptism is received, but afterwards, and throughout their whole life, it 
 efficaciously contributes to the confirmation of their faith and further 
 renewal." 
 
 Grh. (IX, 169) : "To infants Baptism is, primarily, the ordinary 
 means of regeneration and purification from sin ; . . . secondarily, it is 
 the seal of righteousness and the confirmation of faith ; to adult be- 
 lievers it serves principally as a seal and testimony of the grace of God, 
 sonship and eternal life, but in a less principal sense it increases renova- 
 tion and the gifts of the Holy Spirit. Infants by Baptism receive the 
 first fruits of the Spirit and of faith ; adults, who through the Word 
 have received the first fruits of faith and of the Holy Spirit, procure an 
 increase of these gifts by Baptism." 
 
 Hfrffr. (500): "But what? Suppose one is regenerated by the 
 Word. Has he need of Baptism also? And can Baptism be said to be 
 to him the laver of regeneration ? Answer: Both. For believers, too, 
 ought to be baptized, unless they be excluded by a case of necessity. 
 And when they are baptized, Baptism is truly to them the laver of re- 
 generation, because it augments regeneration, wrought by the Word, by 
 a wonderful addition ; because, also, the sacramental act seals the re- 
 generation of faith to absolute certainty." 
 
 [9] Although Baptism, where it is rightly performed, is a Sacrament 
 and offers saving grace, without any respect to the faith of the recip- 
 ient, yet it is also true that, in the case of adults, a beneficial result 
 follows only where Baptism is received by faith. The question : Is a 
 hypocrite, therefore, also regenerated, if he receive Baptism? is thus 
 answered by Hfrffr. (499) : " In such a case we must distinguish 
 between the substance of Baptism and its fruits. For a hypocrite, if he 
 be baptized, receives indeed true Baptism, as to its substance, which 
 consists in the legitimate administration of the Sacrament according to 
 the words of the institution and in the promise of olivine grace. But as 
 long as he perseveres in his hypocrisy and infidelity, he is destitute of 
 its salutary fruits and effects, which only believers experience. There 
 fore, God really offers his grace and the forgiveness of sins to him who 
 is baptized, and desires on his part to preserve that covenant perpetually 
 
INFANT BAPTISM. 551 
 
 firm and entire without any change, so that the grace promised in the 
 covenant may always be accessible to him who is baptized, and that he 
 may enjoy it as soon as he repents ; but, as long as he remain a hypo- 
 crite and impenitent, he is destitute of it," Quest. (IV, 117) : " Even 
 to all hypocrites Baptism offers spiritual gifts, as regeneration and what- 
 ever is comprehended under it, the gift of faith, remission of sins, etc., 
 . . . but some adults, by actual impenitence, hypocrisy, and obsti- 
 nacy, defraud themselves of the saving efficacy of Baptism ; and hence, 
 although these gifts be offered to them, they are not actually conferred ; 
 yet, in the meantime, it is and remains in itself a salutary organ and 
 means of regeneration, since the deprival of the first act does not follow 
 from the deprival of the second act through some fault of the subject." 
 Cat. Maj. (IV, 33) : " Faith alone makes the person worthy to re- 
 ceive profitably this salutary and divine water. For, as this is offered 
 and promised to us in the words together with the water, it cannot be 
 received otherwise than by cordially believing it. Without faith, Bap- 
 tism profits nothing ; although it cannot be denied that in itself it is a 
 heavenly and inestimable treasure." 
 
 From this follows the antithesis against the Romanists, who main- 
 tain : " That Baptism confers grace ex opere operato ; i. e., by virtue of 
 the sacramental action itself, so that faith is excluded by the efficiency 
 of sacramental grace." 
 
 [10] Br. (686) : " That infants are to be baptized, is plain from the 
 testimony of John 3: 5, and Mark 10: 14, taken together, thus : 1. 
 Whom Christ desires to come to him for salvation, but who cannot at- 
 tain to eternal life in the ordinary way except through the medium of 
 Baptism, upon these Baptism should be conferred, as the ordinary 
 means, and to them it should not be denied. But, Christ desires infants 
 to be saved (Mark 10 : 14) who cannot attain to eternal life in the or- 
 dinary way, unless through the medium of Baptism (by virtue of the 
 general assertion, John 3:5); therefore, etc. 2. Whom Christ desires 
 to be brought to himself, that they may enjoy his spiritual blessing, 
 they are to be brought to him by Baptism as the ordinary means. But 
 Christ desires infants to be brought to him, that they may enjoy a spir- 
 itual blessing (Mark 10: 14); therefore, etc. 3. The command, Matt. 
 28: 19, to baptize all nations, is properly extended to infants also, who 
 constitute a portion of the nations. 4. The examples which show that 
 whole families were baptized, e. g., Acts 16 : 15, 33 ; 18 : 8 ; 1 Cor. 1 : 
 16, are properly believed to embrace infants, who doubtless constituted 
 a part of the families. 5. Add also the analogy of circumcision, which 
 was administered to infants; and, 6. That, as the promise of the cove- 
 
552 MEANS OF GRACE. 
 
 nant of grace, Acts 2 : 39, belongs to infants, so also does the seal of 
 the covenant, which is Baptism. Finally, 7. As the whole Church is 
 cleansed by the washing of water through the Word (Eph. 5 : 26), this 
 properly refers to infants also, for they too, though unclean by nature, 
 are nevertheless to be ingrafted into the Church." 
 
 Cat. Maj. (IV, 49) : "That the Baptism of infants is pleasing and 
 grateful to Christ is abundantly manifest from what he himself has 
 done, viz., because God has sanctified, and made partakers of the Holy 
 Spirit, many of those who were baptized immediately after their birth. 
 But there are many also, at the present day, of whom we perceive that 
 they have the Holy Spirit, as they give certain proof of this, both in 
 doctrine and life ; just as by the grace of God there is granted to us the 
 ability to interpret the Scriptures and know Christ, which every one 
 knows to be impossible without the aid of the Holy Spirit. . . . But if 
 the Baptism of children were not pleasing to Christ, he would not give 
 to any of them the Holy Spirit, nor even a particle of it ; and, that I 
 may say in a word what I think, there would not have been among 
 men a single Christian through all the ages that have elapsed until the 
 present day." 
 
 The objection of the opponents, viz., "The Sacraments are of no ad- 
 vantage without faith, but infants have no faith," is considered untena- 
 ble, for faith is taken into the account only in the case of adults, who are 
 already capable of being influenced by the Word. Stated generally, 
 however, the proposition, " that the Sacraments are operative only when 
 faith is present" is false, for the Sacrament, as a means of salvation and 
 as the visible Word, is designed, just as the audible Word, to produce 
 faith, and really produces it when there is no hinderance opposed to it 
 on the part of man, which is the case in children. Br. (690) says : 
 "Infants, on account of their age, cannot put any hinderance in the way 
 of divine grace, or maliciously oppose it, and hence they immediately 
 obtain grace by the use of the constituted and unimpeded means." Grh. 
 (IX, 246): " We therefore invert the argument: Infants have no faith, 
 viz., with respect to their corrupt nature, because, on account of their 
 carnal generation from their parents, they are flesh " The Dogmaticians 
 accordingly maintain most positively, upon the authority of Tit. 3: 5, 
 that faith is produced in children through Baptism (Grh. (IX, 246): 
 " Baptism is the washing of regeneration ; but regeneration cannot take 
 place without faith), although they confess that they cannot clearly un- 
 derstand what kind of faith this is. Grh. (IX, 27o) : " We are not solic- 
 itous about the mode of this faith, but we simply acquiesce in the fact 
 that infants really believe. [Chemnitz, Formula 1567, quoted by Grh. 
 
CAN INFANTS BELIEVE? 553 
 
 (IX, 273): "When we say that infants believe or have faith, it must 
 not be imagined that infants understand or perceive the movements of 
 faith ; but the error of those is rejected who imagine that baptized infants 
 please God and are saved, without any action, within them, of the Holy 
 Spirit, while Christ clearly says : ' Except a man be born,' " etc. " The 
 Holy Spirit also is always given with the remission of sins, nor can any 
 one, without the Holy Spirit, please God, Rom. 8. Since, therefore, 
 it is certain that baptized infants are members of the Church, and please 
 God, it is also certain that the Holy Spirit is efficacious within them, 
 and, that too, in such a way that they can receive the kingdom of 
 heaven, i. e., the grace of God, and the forgiveness of sins. Although 
 we neither understand nor can explain in words of what nature is that 
 action or operation of the Holy Spirit in infants who are baptized, nev- 
 ertheless, from the Word of God it is certain that this occurs. This 
 action or operation of the Holy Spirit in infants we call faith, and say 
 that infants believe. For the means or instrument, whereby the king- 
 dom of God, offered in the Word and Sacrament, is received, Scripture 
 calls faith, and says that believers receive the kingdom of God."] . . . 
 
 Quen. (IV, 153) calls attention to a difference between the primary 
 and immediate act or operation of justifying faith, " by which it reposes 
 in Christ the Mediator and apprehends his benefits by the operation of 
 the Holy Spirit, and this is the internal and formal faith which we attri- 
 bute to children ; and the secondary and mediate, by which faith is drawn 
 out externally towards our neighbors in acts of charity, which we deny 
 to infants." . . . The objection, that infants are incapable of faith, be- 
 because their reason is not developed, he opposes with the distinction : 
 " between an intelligent and rational soul, and its operation and use. 
 Faith requires an intelligent and rational soul as its subject, and hence 
 faith cannot be excited in brutes, yet this faith does not depend on the 
 operation and use of the same." 
 
 Chmn. (Loc. c. Th., Ill, 160) : "We by no means grant that infants 
 who are baptized are either without faith or are baptized on the faith of 
 others. The faith of others, indeed, that is of parents or those offering 
 them, leads children to Christ in Baptism, Mark 10: 13, and prays that 
 they may be endowed with faith of their own. But there is no doubt 
 that through the washing of water by the Word, Christ operates by his 
 Spirit in children who are baptized, and causes their reception into the 
 kingdom of God, although we do not understand in what manner* this is 
 done. For Baptism is the laver of regeneration and the renewal of the 
 Holy Spirit who is poured out upon those baptized, that, being justified, 
 they may become heirs of eternal life, Tit. 3:5; Matt. 10 : 15, and this 
 36 
 
554 MEANS OF GRACE. 
 
 is called the faith of infants. For, as the circumcision of children, in 
 the Old Testament, was the seal of the righteousness of faith, so, be- 
 cause in the New Testament baptized infants please God and are saved, 
 they cannot and ought not to be cast out among unbelievers, but are 
 properly reckoned among believers. Though faith cometh of hearing in 
 another way, in intelligent, sensible, willing adults, than in infants, not 
 yet having the use of their reason." Br. (690) adds to this: "It is 
 not to be supposed that the actual benefit of regeneration, or the pro- 
 duction of faith in infants, is to be deferred to years of discretion, and 
 that they meanwhile are in no way received into grace." Hence Con- 
 firmation cannot be considered the completion of infant Baptism. The 
 Ap. Conf. (VII, 6) says of it only this : " Confirmation and extreme 
 unction are rites received from the fathers, which, however, the Church 
 never requires as necessary to salvation, because they are not com- 
 manded by God." Chmn. (Ex. C. Trid., II, 113) : "Our theologians 
 have often shown that the rite of confirmation, when the useless, super- 
 stitious, and unscriptural traditions respecting it have been laid aside, 
 may be used piously and to the edification of the Church in this way, 
 viz., that those who were baptized in infancy, when they come to years 
 of discretion, should be diligently instructed by a clear and simple set- 
 ting forth of the doctrines of the Church ; and, when they seem moder- 
 ately grounded in the rudiments, they should be presented before the 
 bishop* and the church, and then the child, having been baptized in in- 
 fancy, should first be admonished in a short and simple address con- 
 cerning his Baptism. . . . Secondly. The child itself should make a 
 personal and public profession of this doctrine and faith. Thirdly. He 
 should be questioned concerning the principal doctrines of the Christian 
 religion. . . . Fourthly. He should be reminded and should show by 
 his profession that he differs from all heathen opinions. Fifthly. A 
 serious and solemn exhortation should be added. . . . Sixthly. Public 
 prayer should be made for these children ; . . .to which prayer, with- 
 out superstition, the imposition of hands may be added. Nor would 
 such prayer be fruitless, for it is supported by the promises concerning 
 the gift of perseverance and the grace of confirmation." 
 
 * [The "Reformation of Cologne," prepared by Bucer. Melanchthon, Sarcerius, 
 etc., in 1543, says : " It is not the prerogative of bishops so that no one else may 
 administer it, as Baptism, which is far higher, is administered by ordinary minis- 
 ters, yea, in case of necessity, by any Christian. It is assigned to bishops only 
 that they may learn to know their people." So the Mark-Brandenburg Agende 
 of 1540 : " Since, thank God, the population in our lands is great, and the bishops 
 few, so that there will be too many for them to hear and instruct individually, 
 they may commit this to their pastors.'"] 
 
BAPTISMAL GRACE CONTINUOUS. 555 
 
 [11] Br. (690): ''Baptism efficaciously contributes to the confirma- 
 tion of the faith of believers and their further renovation, not only when 
 it is received, but throughout their whole life. (For the covenant of 
 grace, of which Baptism is the seal will continue firm and ratified forever 
 on the part of God.)" 
 
 [Chemnitz (Examen, Preuss. ed., p.276) : "Christ himself affirms 
 that the action of Baptism respects not merely either the past or the pres- 
 ent, but he uses the future in Mark 16:16. It is noteworthy how Scrip- 
 ture extends the efficacy of baptism for believers, to all times, present (1 
 Pet. 3 : 21), past (Tit. 3: 5), and future (Mark 16:16; Eph. 5 : 26, 27). 
 The purifying and sanctifying virtue, efficacy and operation of Baptism, 
 therefore, according to Scripture, remain and work throughout the en- 
 tire life of the Christian ; as Paul clearly teaches in many words, Pom. 
 6. The compact of grace and covenant of peace which God makes in 
 Baptism, is not merely for the past, or for that moment; but it is an 
 eternal covenant, as he says in Is. 54 : 10. For the covenant was not 
 made upon the condition that if we would fall from it by sin, it should 
 be so broken, that even though we would return to it in true repentance 
 by faith, God would no longer keep it. For see Rom. 3: 3 ; 2 Tim. 2: 
 13, and that most charming description, Jer. 3 : 1 sqq. That this comfort 
 is rightly applied to Baptism, is shown by the marriage illustration in 
 Eph. 5. Lest there might still be doubt, Paul recalls the Galatians who 
 had fallen after Baptism, to the promise made in their Baptism, Gal. 3 : 
 27, as he also did the Corinthians in 1 Cor. 12: 13. . . . Baptism is the 
 solemn seal and perpetual attestation that communion and participation 
 in Christ's blessings are presented and given us if Ave believe; 'for he 
 that believeth and is baptized shall be saved.' But there is true faith 
 not only when in the very action of Baptism, one apprehends the prom- 
 ise of grace, but even when after Baptism he retains it; yea, when after 
 a fall he again in repentance lays hold of it, the faith is true ; and what 
 Christ says, remains true, viz., 'He that believeth,' etc."] 
 
 Cat. Maj. (IV, 76): "In Baptism, grace, the Spirit, and the power 
 are given to the baptized, to subdue the old man in us, that the new 
 man may come forth and be strengthened. Hence Baptism always re- 
 mains the same ; and, although any one driven by the storms of sin 
 may fall away from it, yet the way of access to it is always open, that 
 we may again subject the old man under the yoke of repentance. But 
 it is not necessary to be again sprinkled with water ; for, if we were 
 immersed in water one hundred times, yet it would be only one Bap- 
 tism. But the work and the signification continues and is permanent." 
 
 Holl. (1097): "Baptism is of such wonderful efficacy, in conse- 
 
556 MEANS OF GRACE. 
 
 quence of its divine appointment, that God, on his part, in view of the 
 baptismal covenant, recalls the sinner to himself and forgives his of- 
 fences, if he be penitent ; and the contrite sinner, on his part, panting 
 after the grace of God, can encourage himself by the remembrance of 
 his Baptism." 
 
 Hfrffr. (497): "But 'Do we not often sin again after Baptism ?' 
 True, but that requires no repetition of Baptism ; for God, who, in this 
 ordinance enters into a covenant of grace with us, is unchangeable in his 
 will and promises, and on his part seriously and earnestly desires to pre- 
 serve it perpetually inviolate, firm, and unbroken ; only let us return by 
 repentance to him who in Baptism has promised us grace and forgive- 
 ness of sins ; and thus, in the newness of life we shall finally enjoy the 
 fruits of Baptism, of which we have in the meanwhile been deprived by 
 impenitence." 
 
 [12] Cat. Maj. (IV, 64): " Finally, we must not omit to mention, 
 or fail to understand, what is signified by Baptism, and why God has 
 commanded this Sacrament, whereby we are first admitted to the Chris- 
 tian communion, to be administered with such external signs and acts. 
 The work, moreover, or act, is, that we who are to be baptized are 
 plunged into water, by which we are covered, and, after having been 
 immersed, we are again drawn forth. These two things, to be plunged 
 into the water and to come out of it again, signify the power and efficacy 
 of Baptism, which are nothing else than the destruction of the old Adam 
 and the resurrection of the new man. These two things are to be unceas- 
 ingly practiced by us throughout our whole life ; so that the Christian life 
 is nothing else than a daily Baptism, begun indeed once, but continually 
 perpetuated." (74): " From this you see very clearly that Baptism, 
 both by its efficacy and its signification, embraces also the third Sacra- 
 ment, which they are accustomed to call penance, which really is nothing 
 else than Baptism, or its exercise. For what is penitence, unless it be 
 earnestly to attack the old man, that his lusts may be subdued, and to 
 put on the new man? Wherefore, if you are living in penitence, you 
 are living in Baptism, which not only signifies this new life, but also 
 produces it, both beginning and carrying it on." (79): " So that re- 
 pentance or penitence is nothing else than a return and re-approach to 
 Baptism, that that may again be sought and practiced which before had 
 been begun, but negligently intermitted." 
 
 [13] Quen. (IV, 117): "Baptism properly administered, is not to 
 be repeated and reiterated : (1) because it is the Sacrament of initia- 
 tion, for, as we are born but once, so also we are but once born again ; 
 (2) because there is no precept, no promise, no example, in Holy Scrip- 
 
THE NECESSITY OF BAPTISM. 557 
 
 ture for such repetition ; (3) because the fruit of Baptism is perpetual, 
 and the unbelief of man does not make the faith of God of no effect." 
 [Chemnitz, Examen, Preuss, p. 279 : " This doctrine concerning the 
 non-repetition of Baptism, has been given not only that we should dis- 
 pute that it should not be repeated, but that the sources of consolation 
 might be shown so that even after a fall, when again converted, we have 
 reaccess to the covenant of peace, made and sealed unto us in our Bap- 
 tism."] 
 
 [14] Grh. (IX, 282): " (We teach) that Baptism, as the ordinary 
 Sacrament of initiation, and the means of regeneration, is necessary for 
 regeneration and salvation to all without exception, even to the children 
 of believers ; yet, meanwhile, that, in case of deprivation or of impossi- 
 bility, the children of Christians may be saved through an extraordin- 
 ary and peculiar divine dispensation. For the necessity of Baptism is 
 not absolute, but ordinate. On our part, we are bound to receive Bap- 
 tism ; yet an extraordinary act of God is not to be denied in the case of 
 infants brought to Christ by godly parents and the Church through 
 prayer, and dying before the blessing of Baptism could be brought to 
 them, since God will not so bind his grace and saving efficacy to Bap- 
 tism, but that he is both willing and able to exert the same extraordin- 
 arily in case of deprivation. . . . We neither can, nor ought we rashly 
 to condemn those infants that die either in their mother's womb, or sud- 
 denly for any cause before receiving Baptism ; we should rather con- 
 clude that the prayers of godly parents, or, if the parents in this matter 
 are neglectful, the prayers of the Church, poured out before God for 
 these infants, are mercifully heard, and that they are received into favor 
 and life by God." 
 
 Holl. (1098) : " Baptism is necessary, through the necessity of pre- 
 cept and means; through an ordinate and not an absolute necessity; 
 inasmuch as we believe that the* children of Christians dying without 
 Baptism are saved." 
 
 [15] Kg. (244) thus compendiously states the designs of Baptism: 
 " There is a supreme design of Baptism, and an intermediate one. The 
 supreme design is either absolutely supreme, viz., the glory of the divine 
 wisdom and goodness; or secondarily supreme, viz., the salvation of 
 souls. The intermediate design is either primary or secondary. The 
 primary, in infants, is the conferring of faith and of covenant grace ; in 
 adult believers, the confirmation and sealing of faith and grace; w ith 
 
 7 DO' 
 
 respect to all kinds of candidates for Baptism, the offer of faith and 
 grace, and the spiritual blessings belonging thereto.. The secondary 
 design is (1) the distinguishing of Christians from the assemblies of the 
 
558 MEANS OF GRACE. 
 
 Gentiles ; (2) an admonition of natural depravity ; (3) the commemo- 
 ration of the love of Christ ; (4) an exhortation to newness of life." 
 
 §55. (2.) The Lord's Supper. 
 
 As in Baptism, so in the Holy Supper, we distinguish essential 
 nature, form, and design. 
 
 1. Its Essential Nature. — This is expressed in the words 
 of the institution, to which alone we are referred, [1] and these 
 declare, if we interpret and understand them agreeably to the 
 language, and we dare not adopt any other mode, [2] that we 
 are to partake therein not only of bread and wine, but at the 
 same time also of the body and blood of Christ. [3] According 
 to this, bread and wine are only the external visible elements 
 through which the body and blood of Christ are communicated, 
 and the Holy Supper is the sacred act in which this takes place. 
 "The Sacrament of the altar is the true body and blood -of our 
 Lord Jesus Christ, in and under bread and wine, instituted and 
 commanded by the word of Christ to be eaten and drank by us 
 Christians." Cat. Maj. (Y, 8). [4] But, in order most dis- 
 tinctly to state the meaning of such a participation of the body 
 and blood of Christ, we add : 
 
 (a) That, as by bread and wine, real and true bread and real 
 wine are understood, so also, by the body and blood of Christ, 
 the real and true body and the real and true blood of Jesus Christ, 
 as he possesses both since his glorification, must be understood ; 
 [5] and, as the bread and wine, so also this body and this blood 
 of Christ are really and truly present. [6] 
 
 (b) That in the same sense, and in the same manner, in which 
 we partake of bread and wine, so also we partake of the body 
 and blood of Christ; so that therefore in both cases the partici- 
 pation is not to be understood in a metaphorical, but in a literal 
 sense. As there is therefore an oral and real participation of 
 bread and wine, so there is also of the body and blood of Christ ; 
 [7] but yet so that, in the mode of the participation, the same 
 differences which naturally exist between bread and wine and 
 body and blood are here also to be observed; according to which, 
 therefore, our mouth receives the purely material elements of 
 bread and wine in a different way from that in which it receives 
 the glorified body and glorified blood of Christ. [8] 
 
THE LORD'S SUPPER DEFINED. 559 
 
 Inasmuch as, according to this, we cannot partake of bread 
 and wine in the Holy Supper without at the same time partak- 
 ing of the body and blood of Christ, and inasmuch as we can par- 
 take of the body and blood of Christ only through the medium 
 of the participation of the bread and wine, we perceive from 
 this, that in the Holy Supper a peculiar union of the body and 
 blood of Christ takes place with the bread and wine. [9] But 
 we are not able to describe this union, according to its essential 
 nature, for it is unique in its character and incomprehensible ; 
 hence we must limit ourselves to removing false representations 
 of it. It would be a false representation of it if we believed in a 
 change of one substance into the other, as the Komish Church 
 does in the dogma of transubstantiation, which is altogether a 
 false doctrine, for the Holy Scriptures declare both that the 
 bread and wine, and that the body and blood, are present in the 
 Holy Supper; or, if we believed in the combination of both sub- 
 stances into one ; or, if we thought that this union were one ex- 
 tending beyond the Lord's Supper and continually existing; or, 
 if we maintained that the body and blood were somehow locally 
 included in the bread and wine ; or, finally, if we held that this 
 union is of the same nature as that between the divine and the 
 human nature of Christ. [10] 
 
 2. The Form. — In the bread and wine the body and blood of 
 Christ are communicated to us only when the mode prescribed 
 by the Lord in this solemnity is perfectly observed. There must 
 be, therefore : (a) The consecration, (b) The consecrated ele- 
 ments must be really distributed and partaken of; for only in 
 these cases do bread and wine cease to be common and ordinary 
 elements, and at the same time the body and blood of Christ are 
 comprehended in and by them. [11] Where all this is done, there 
 also the Holy Supper is a real Sacrament, and neither the faith 
 of the communicant, [12] nor the state of mind of the officiating 
 minister, [13] is a condition of the real presence of the body and 
 blood of Christ. 
 
 3. The Design. — According to the express command of the 
 Lord, Christians are to partake of the Holy Supper in remem- 
 brance of him. [14] The believing participation will have the 
 effect that the communicants, with the body and blood of Christ, 
 
£60 MEANS OF GRACE. 
 
 will receive also all the benefits which Christ procured by the 
 offering of his body on the cross. All the benefits, then, which 
 Christ procured for us by his death, are communicated to us in 
 the Holy Supper, [15] but yet in such manner that faith is pre- 
 supposed as already existing in those who partake of the Holy 
 Supper ; and therefore the effect of the Supper does not consist 
 in the production, so. much as in the more thorough establish- 
 ment and confirmation and more cordial appropriation of those 
 benefits. [16] The most prominent result is: (a) The sealing of 
 the Gospel promise of the remission of sins, and the confirmation 
 of our faith, for no surer and more certain pledge can be given 
 us than the body and blood of Christ ; (b) The ingrafting into 
 Christ and spiritual nourishment to eternal life, for it is in the 
 Supper that the closest union with Christ takes place. [17] In 
 the participation of the Holy Supper, Christians acknowledge 
 themselves as belonging to one head, and thus the Holy Supper, 
 at the same time, serves to strengthen the bond of love among 
 them. [18] 
 
 [1] Holl. (1107) : " The norm of the whole doctrine of the Sacra- 
 ment of the Eucharist is given in the words of the institution, which 
 are found in Matt. 26 : 26 ; Mark 14 : 22 ; Luke 22 : 19 ; 1 Cor. 11 : 
 23. The Capernaitic discourse of Christ, John 6 : 26 seq., is by no 
 means the norm or foundation of knowing or establishing this doctrine." 
 
 Chmn. (de c. Dom., 9): "As some dogmas of the Church and single 
 articles of faith have, as it were, their proper foundation in certain par- 
 ticular passages of Scripture where they are expressly taught and ex- 
 plained, that their true and genuine meaning may be properly sought 
 and surely gathered from those passages; so, beyond controversy, the 
 correct doctrine of the Lord's Supper has its peculiar place and proper 
 foundation in the words of the institution. All confess and yield this 
 to the words, but when the thing spoken of comes to be treated, there is 
 plainly a difference. For all the Sacramentarians, however many there 
 may be, do not derive what they wish to think and believe concerning 
 the Lord's Supper from the words of the institution, understood literally 
 and simply as they stand ; but they take their opinion from other pas- 
 sages of the Scriptures, most of which say nothing about the Lord's Sup- 
 per, each one choosing other passages, according to some analogy of his 
 own, as his fancy may dictate. And often they gather from other 
 Scripture passages what they wish to believe on this subject, then at last 
 
THE WORDS OF INSTITUTION. 561 
 
 thev go to the words of the institution, and then comes the tug and toil 
 of intruding upon the words of the institution, by a figurative and vio- 
 lent interpretation, their opinion elsewhere conceived. And thus among 
 those arguments which the Sacramentarians accumulate to establish 
 and confirm their opinion of the Lord's Supper, the words of the insti- 
 tution have properly no place. But when, in refutation, those things 
 which seem to oppose their asserted opinion are to be overthrown, then 
 at last these words are heard, viz., ' this is my body;' yet so as to sig- 
 nify, not that which they declare, but so as to be compelled to serve a 
 presumptuous opinion derived elsewhere." 
 
 [2] Form. Coxc. (Epit. VII, 7): "We believe, etc., that the words 
 of the Testament of Christ are not to be taken in any other sense than 
 as the words sound to the very letter." Holl. (1111): " TVe must not 
 depart from the obvious meaning of the words of the Holy Supper, but 
 they are to be understood most simply and literally as they stand. 
 Note: We do not here speak of all the words of the institution, but of 
 the substantial and constitutive words : ' This is my body, this is my 
 blood.' " 
 
 Br. (703) very briefly condenses the proof as follows: "That these 
 words of Christ are to he taken in their native force and intention, and 
 that we are not to pervert them from their proper signification to a fig- 
 ure, appears : (1) From the common and natural rule of interpretation, 
 which retains the literal signification, unless urgent necessity compel us 
 to adopt a figurative one; which rule is indeed most solicitously to be 
 observed in regard to supernatural subjects and those which pertain 
 to faith. (2) That when the three evangelists and Paul, at different 
 times and places, speak of the institution of the Lord's Supper, not one 
 of them ever intimates that the words have a figurative meaning, or 
 that we are to believe that we eat not the body but a sign of the body ; 
 that we drink not the blood but a sign of the blood. (3) From the har- 
 mony of 1 Cor. 11 : 27, 28, and 10:16. In the former passage the un- 
 worthy communicant is said to be guilty of the body and blood of the 
 Lord, received in an unworthy or contumelious manner, because the 
 bread and wine are the communion of the body and blood of Christ, as 
 is taught in the latter passage. But this communion is not a mere sig- 
 nificance, but a real union. (4) From the nature of testaments, in 
 which literalness and perspicuity of language are particularly required; 
 and least of all is it to be supposed that Christ, in his testament, has 
 either designedly or imprudently given occasion of dispute and strife by 
 figurativeness of language." Others derive an additional argument 
 from the absurdity of the figurative meaning. Form. Coxc. (Sol. Dec, 
 VII, 43-60.) 
 
562 MEANS OF GRACE. 
 
 [3] The literal sense is thus explained by Holl. (1108): "In the 
 former proposition (this is my body) the demonstrative pronoun this de- 
 notes the entire sacramental complex, consisting of bread and the body 
 of Christ; in the latter proposition (this is my blood) it likewise denotes 
 the entire complex, consisting of everything in the Sacrament composed 
 of the wine and the blood of Christ, mysteriously united." (Inasmuch 
 as the pronoun this is employed with regard to both the bread and the 
 body, the Romish doctrine of a transubstantiation is excluded.) " The 
 substantive verb is connects the predicate with the subject, and denotes 
 that that which is offered in the Holy Supper is really and truly not 
 only bread, but also the body of Christ." 
 
 The meaning of the words then is this: "This which I offer to you, 
 which you are to receive and eat, is not only bread, but it is besides my 
 body. This which I offer to you, and which you are to receive and 
 drink, is not only wine, but besides it is my blood." Or, as it is most 
 frequently expressed: " In, w T ith, and under the bread and wine, Christ 
 presents his true body and blood to be truly and substantially eaten and 
 drank by us." This mode of expression is confirmed by the Form. 
 Conc. (Sol. Dec, VII, 35) thus : " Besides those phrases used by Christ 
 and Paul [viz., that the bread in the Supper is the body of Christ, or 
 the communion of the body of Christ], we employ other forms of speech 
 also, e. g. y when w T e say that the body of Christ is present and presented 
 under the bread ; this we do for weighty reasons. For, first, we use 
 these phrases in order to reject Romish transubstantiation. In the next 
 place, we wish also in this way to teach the sacramental union of the 
 substance of the unchanged bread with the body of Christ. In the same 
 way the passage, John 1 : 14, 'The Word was made flesh ,' is repeated 
 and declared in other analogous passages, ex. gr., Col. 2:9; Acts 10 : 
 38; 2 Cor. 5 : 19. These passages, besides the one quoted from John, 
 repeat and declare, viz., that by the incarnation the divine essence was 
 not changed into the human nature, but that the two natures are per- 
 sonally united without confusion." Still another mode of expression is 
 this: "This, which is exhibited through the medium of bread, is the 
 body of Christ." 
 
 [4] Hutt. (Loc. Th., 230): " The Lord's Supper is a Sacrament of 
 the New Testament instituted by Christ, in which the true body and 
 true blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, in and under bread and wine, is 
 truly distributed to all who eat and drink, and the promise of grace is 
 applied and sealed to every believer." 
 
 Kg. (248): " The Lord's Supper is the second New Testament Sacra- 
 ment in which God, to-day, by the hand of the regular minister of the 
 
TEE SACRAMENTAL PRESENCE. 563 
 
 Church, through the medium of the consecrated bread, truly and really 
 presents to the communicants his true and substantial body to be eaten 
 by the bodily mouth, yet in a supernatural way ; and through the medi- 
 um of the consecrated wine, he truly and really presents to the commu- 
 nicants his true and substantial blood, to be drank by the bodily mouth, 
 yet in a manner hyperphysical and unknown to us ; and by this he con- 
 firms their faith and seals to them his covenant grace, to the praise of 
 his goodness and wisdom, and the salvation of those who partake." 
 
 In the Scriptures this Sacrament is called the Lord's Supper, Seiirvov 
 Kvpianbv, 1 Cor. 11 : 20; the table of the Lord, rpd-e^a rov nvpiov, 1 Cor. 
 10:21; communion, /coiww'a, 1 Cor. 10: 16; the new covenant, km»$ 
 8ia#vK V , Luke 22: 20; 1 Cor. 11: 25. In the writings of the Church 
 Fathers, the eucharist, evxaptoria • a religious service, o'wa^tq • a love-feast, 
 aydirrf; a liturgy, tetrovpyla ; a sacrifice, ftvoia' an offering, rrpoofopa,} a 
 mystery, pvorlipiov. In the writings of the Latin Fathers, the Sacrament 
 of the altar — the mass — missa. 
 
 The Dogmaticians accordingly distinguish between the celestial and 
 terrestrial matter in the Lord's Supper. Holl. (1116): " The terres- 
 trial matter of the Lord's Supper is partly bread ; in regard to its sub- 
 stance, genuine ; it is not important, however, in regard to its quantity, 
 whether it be more or less, or whether it be round or oblong ; in regard 
 to its quality, whether it be unfermented or fermented; in regard to the 
 kind of grain, whether it be wheat, rye, or barley. It is partly wine ; 
 in regard to its substance, genuine ; but it is of no account whether it be 
 red or white, pure or somewhat diluted with water. The celestial mat- 
 ter is the true and substantial body of Christ, and also the true and 
 substantial blood of Christ." 
 
 [5] Chmn. d. c. D., 14): "When, in speaking of the bread in the 
 Lord's Supper, we say that it is the body of Christ, the word bread has 
 and retains its literal signification. And when to the word body is added 
 the phrase, ' which is given for you,' we are compelled to take it in no 
 other than in its literal and natural meaning, namely, of that substance 
 of Christ's human nature, which was conceived by the Holy Ghost, 
 born of the Virgin Mary, and suspended on the cross." Holl. (1118): 
 "It is readily inferred that in the Eucharist with the consecrated 
 bread there is given us to eat not a typical body, or a figurative one, 
 such as was the body of the Paschal lamb, so far as it shadowed forth 
 and prefigured the body of Christ; not a mystical body, which is the 
 Church, Eph. 1 : 23; not the sign of a body, for that was not crucified 
 for us; but the true and personal body of Christ, belonging to the Son 
 of God, and therefore full of God, and majestic. . . . It is the now 
 
564 MEANS OF GRACE. 
 
 glorified and most glorious body of Christ. For, although we always 
 partake of the crucified and dead body of Christ, as to its merit, yet it is 
 now no longer in that condition ; but we partake of it in the state in 
 which it now is. It is not therefore to be circumscribed by the laws of 
 nature." 
 
 [6] Form. Conc. (Sol. Dec, VII, 9): "It is taught, that in the 
 Holy Supper the true body and blood of Christ are truly present, and 
 distributed and received under the form of bread and wine." 
 
 Grh. (X, 165): " After it is demonstrated that the words of the Holy 
 Supper are to be taken nara to pr/rov, according to their genuine, literal 
 and natural meaning, the opinion of our churches concerning the true, 
 real, and substantial presence of the body and blood of Christ in the 
 Supper cannot be doubtful or uncertain, since it immediately flows from 
 the words of the institution nara prjrov, and taken literally." This pres- 
 ence is called sacramental (ib., 168), "because the celestial object in 
 this mystery is bestowed and presented to us through the medium of ex- 
 ternal sacramental symbols ; it is called true and real, to exclude the 
 figment of a figurative, imaginary, and representative presence; substan- 
 tial, to exclude the subterfuge of our opponents concerning the merely 
 efficacious presence of the body and blood of Christ in this myster.y ; 
 mystical, supernatural, and incomprehensible, because in this mystery the 
 body and blood of Christ are present, not in a worldly manner, but in a 
 mystical, supernatural, and incomprehensible manner. Some of our 
 theologians have called it a corporeal presence, but only with respect to 
 the object and not at all to the mode ; they wish to say by this, that not 
 only the virtue and efficacy, but the substance itself of the body and 
 blood of Christ, is present in the Holy Supper ; for they oppose this word 
 to spiritual presence as it is defined by their opponents, but by no means 
 wish to say thereby that the body of Christ is present in a corporeal and 
 quantitative manner." 
 
 In order to reply to the charge, that the Lutheran Dogmaticians had 
 only inferred the doctrine of this presence from their doctrine of the 
 person of Christ, Hutt. (Loc. c, p. 716) remarks : " We must consider, 
 that in this controversy concerning the Eucharist, not one, but two dif- 
 ferent questions are mooted; one of which is concerning the will and 
 intention of Christ : ' Whether he wished really to present his body 
 to be eaten in the Supper and his blood to be drank, and so to be most 
 closely present by his body and blood in the Eucharistic bread and wine ?' 
 In regard to this Luther maintained, and we agree with him, that-be- 
 yond all doubt the decision of this. question is to be sought nowhere else 
 than in the article concerning the Lord's Supper. The other question 
 
MODE OF THE SAVIOUR* S PRESENCE IN THE EUCHARIST. 565 
 
 is concerning the power of Christ: 'Whether he be really able to be 
 present, by his body and blood, in all places where this Sacrament is 
 dispensed ? ' In regard to this, he must be stupid who maintains that 
 the decision of these questions is to be sought anywhere else than in the 
 article concerning the person of Christ." If, namely, in the article just 
 mentioned, the possibility, at least, of an omnipresence of Christ was 
 proved, in general (comp. § 33, note 20, at the end), then nothing of 
 consequence can any longer be objected to this mode of special presence 
 which takes place in the Lord's Supper. 
 
 The Dogmaticians take pains to distinguish carefully between this 
 kind of presence and other kinds of presence. Luther, already, made 
 three distinctions of this kind. Comp. Form. Conc. (Sol. Dec, VII, 
 99): " Christ could be anywhere ; first, in a comprehensible and corpo- 
 real manner, which he employed when he sojourned corporeally upon 
 earth, when he was quantitatively circumscribed in a certain place. 
 . . . Secondly, he can be present anywhere in another, incomprehen- 
 sible and spiritual manner, so as not to be circumscribed by a place, but 
 to penetrate all creatures, by virtue of his own perfectly free will; just 
 as my sight penetrates the air, or the light penetrates the water, and is 
 in these things, and yet is not circumscribed by a place. . . . This 
 manner of being present Christ employed when, in his resurrection, he 
 came forth from the closed and sealed tomb, . . . and thus he is also in 
 the bread and wine of the Supper. . . . Besides, he can be anywhere 
 present in a divine and celestial manner, according to which he is one 
 person with God. In this way creatures are much more nearly present 
 to him and more easily penetrated than according to the second kind of 
 presence." In addition to the distinction made between the presence 
 assumed in the Lord's Supper and the general presence (by virtue of 
 which Christ, the God-man, is illocally present to all creatures), Quen. 
 adds also the following distinctions (IV, 193): " We are not inquiring 
 (1) concerning the glorious presence, by which he is present in heaven, 
 in a peculiar manner, among angels and saints ; nor (2) concerning the 
 hypostatic presence, by which the ?i6yog is everywhere near to his as- 
 sumed flesh, and this in turn near to him ; nor (3) concerning the 
 spiritual presence (operative or virtual), i. e., whether Christ be present 
 in the Holy Supper effectually or operatively, as the sun is present to 
 us through light and heat; (4) nor is the question, whether the body and 
 blood of Christ be present in the Holy Supper through a sign, figure, or 
 image of him ; nor (5) does the question concern the Holy Supper that 
 is celebrated in heaven; nor, finally, (6) concerning a presence through 
 apprehension, through faith soaring to heaven ; but the question is : 
 
566 
 
 MEANS OF GRACE. 
 
 Whether the body and blood of Christ, in the administration of the Supper, 
 be so present in their own substance, that with the distributed bread there is 
 at the same time given the very substance of the body of Christ, and in the 
 presented cup there is at the same time presented that very blood which was 
 poured out for us upon the altar of the cross ?" This is maintained. The 
 presence, however, is " no physical, local, and circumscriptive, such as 
 belongs to natural bodies," but a " hyperphysical or supernatural (which 
 we cannot recognize by natural perception)." Holl. (1120) distin- 
 guishes still further a double method of the hyperphysical presence : 
 "Definitive presence is that of a being which is present somewhere, with- 
 out the local occupation of space. In this way angels are present, who, 
 because they are spiritual essences, cannot be measured by any interval 
 of space. This definitive mode of being present will be common to our 
 bodies also, in the life to come. This method Christ also employed when 
 he came forth through the sepulchral stone from the tomb, etc. In this 
 method, we may rightly conclude, the body of Christ is present also in 
 the elemental bread, in the administration of the Lord's Supper; al- 
 though there is besides a sacramental union, also, of the bread with the 
 body of Christ, which depends not precisely or simply upon that defini- 
 tive mode of the presence, but upon a special divine promise. The 
 repletive presence is omnipresence, which belongs to God alone, per se 
 and essentially, and to the human nature of Christ by virtue of its union 
 with the divine, and personally."* 
 
 Other erroneous conceptions are guarded against by Cal. (IX, 307), 
 as follows : " We maintain that the body and blood of Christ are pres- 
 ent in the Supper, not, indeed, through juerovaia, or by substantial trans- 
 mutation, as the Papists hold ; nor by awovaia, or consubstantiation, 
 which the Calvinists calumniously charge upon us ; nor by local inclu- 
 sion, namely, impanation, as flesh is in a meat-pie, and invination, as 
 they are accustomed to charge against us ; nor in the way of a descent 
 from heaven and from the right hand of God, to be followed again by 
 an ascent to heaven and to the right hand of God." . . . 
 
 The objection urged by the Zwinglians against this presence, viz.: 
 " If the body of Christ be present at the same time in heaven, and upon 
 earth in the Lord's Supper, it necessarily follows that it is not a true 
 and human body, for such majesty can be attributed to God alone, but 
 the body of Christ is not at all capable of it," is set aside by the doctrine 
 of the Communicatio Idiomatum (Genus III), to the fuller development 
 of which the Lutheran Church was led by these very objections on the 
 part of the Reformed. (Comp. Form. Conc, VIII, De Persona 
 
 [* See Appendix II. Circumscriptiva.'] 
 
OMNIPRESENCE OF THE HUMAN NATURE OF CHRIST. 567 
 
 Christi.) Quen. (IV, 200) replies to this objection : " There is no 
 contradiction ; the body of Christ is finite, and the same is substantially 
 present everywhere (and especially in the Lord's Supper) without any 
 extension and division ; for both these statements agree with the Scrip- 
 tures; both are to be believed ; nor is the one to be opposed to the other. 
 The axiom which our adversaries here usually bring up against us, viz., 
 4 a natural and finite body cannot be at one and the same time in many 
 places,' avails only in so far as a natural mode of presence is concerned, 
 and is therefore incorrectly applied to articles of mere faith, or is rather 
 used in opposition to the words of Christ. And if the human nature of 
 Christ, without any prejudice to its reality and finiteness, could be as- 
 sumed into the infinite person of the Logos, why, therefore, may not 
 the body of Christ be substantially present everywhere (and especially 
 in the Lord's Supper) without any prejudice to its reality ? Place is an 
 accident ; it does not constitute a body, but is accidentally consequent 
 upon some other accident, for instance, quantity, for the explanation of 
 which no actual limitation is required, but for which the quality of being 
 limitable is of itself sufficient. And, accurately speaking, it is not lo- 
 cality, but locability, not the being in a place, but the ability to be in a 
 place, that is the quality of a physical body. The multiplication of the 
 limit of the presence is not the multiplication of the subject that is 
 present, the variety of the mode is not the multiplication of the thing. 
 The same Christ is present in the Eucharist without the multiplication 
 of himself, as the same God is present in all believers without multipli- 
 cation. We must distinguish, moreover, between a body merely human 
 and - left to itself, and the body peculiar to the loyog and personally 
 united with him. The philosophical axiom, ' A natural body cannot be 
 at one and the game time in many places,' is true of a merely human 
 body, but not of the body united with the Logos." 
 
 Further objections are the following : " (1) That the doctrine of the 
 omnipresence of Christ according to his human nature is opposed to the 
 doctrine of the real, peculiar, divine presence of the body and blood of 
 Christ in the Holy Supper." To this Holl. (1125) replies : "We dis- 
 tinguish between the general and special presence. There is no contra- 
 diction in maintaining that he is omnipresent, and nevertheless is pre- 
 sented to a particular person by a special kind of presence. For thus 
 we read that the omnipresent Holy Spirit descended on Christ in the 
 form of a dove, Matt. 3:16; was bestowed upon the disciples by an ex- 
 ternal breathing, John 20 : 22 ; was communicated to the apostles under 
 the form of fiery tongues, Acts 2:3; and dwells truly and by his gra- 
 cious presence in the bodies of the godly, 1 Cor. 3 : 6. Although, there- 
 
568 MEANS OF GRACE. 
 
 fore, a general omnipresence is communicated to the assumed flesh of 
 Christ by reason of the personal union, yet that does not prevent or de- 
 stroy a special and sacramental presence of the body of Christ. (2) 
 ' The substantial presence of the body of Christ in, with and under the 
 bread is contrary to the first institution and administration of the Sup- 
 per; for when Christ took the bread from the table, broke, and distrib- 
 uted it, he was reclining, together with his disciples, at the table ; but 
 he was not in, with, and under the bread, nor did he break himself in, 
 with and under the bread, nor did he carry himself in his hands.' We 
 reply : It is not contrary to the first institution and administration of 
 the Supper. When Christ took bread from the table, brake, and dis- 
 tributed it, he was of course reclining at the table with his disciples ; 
 and, when he distributed the bread, he at the same time caused his body 
 to be sacramentally in, with, and under the bread, not by removing from 
 the table, but by the presence of his body multiplied by the divine om- 
 nipotence.'' (3) A third objection was based upon the ascension of 
 Christ to heaven. For an answer, comp. § 38, Note 26, and Grh.,X, 
 147 : " Christ thus ascended to heaven that he might ascend also above 
 all heavens, and sit down at the right hand of God, i. e., according to the 
 statement of the Augsb. Conf., Ill, ' That he might powerfully reign 
 and have dominion over all creatures.' This explanation is drawn from 
 the Scripture itself, Ps. 8: 6; Matt. 28: 18; Eph. 1: 20; 4: 10; 1 
 Cur. 15 : 25 ; by the power which is given to Christ, exalted as to his 
 human nature to the right hand of the Father, he is able to subject all 
 things to himself, Phil. 3 : 21 ; by this same power, therefore, he is able 
 to give his body to be eaten by us in the Supper. Where, notice that 
 the ascension of Christ to heaven is described in the Holy Scripturesnot 
 only abstractly and separately, as if it were only a movement of ascent, 
 by which the body of Christ by a local removal ^.Taardatg^ had been 
 carried away from the earth, and by degrees lifted up on high to heaven. 
 . . . but also concretely and conjointly, so that the ascent at the same 
 time embraced the exaltation of Christ to the right hand of God. 
 Wherefore, since, after the ascent according to the flesh, Christ was ele- 
 vated to the omnipotent and omnipresent right hand of God ; therefore, 
 from the ascent, which is inseparable from the sitting at the right hand 
 of God, we are by no means to infer any infirmity or any kind of ab- 
 sence of the flesh of Christ, but rather his infinite majesty and the ef- 
 fects of his divine power." 
 
 [7] Holl. (1130): "The body and blood of Christ, in the proper 
 administration of the Lord's Supper, are received, eaten, and drank by 
 the communicants, not only by the mouth of faith, but also by the mouth 
 of the body." 
 
SACRAMENTAL MANDUCATION. 669 
 
 Chmn. (d. c. D., 19): " It is certain that not bread alone is eaten in 
 the Lord's Supper, for of that which is received and eaten in the Sup- 
 per, Christ says, ' This is my body.' Therefore, in the Holy Supper there 
 is eaten the body of Christ also ; but not simply mentally and spiritually, 
 by faith alone. For, if the word eat in those words of the Holy Supper 
 meant that faith ascended above all heavens in its thoughts, the Lord's 
 Supper might be celebrated without the external oral reception of any- 
 thing which no one has ever dared to imagine. The word eat, therefore, in 
 this place, has and retains its literal and natural signification. For Christ 
 commanded a taking in his Supper when he said, ' Take;' and he de- 
 fines the mode of reception to be with the bodily mouth, when he adds, 
 ' Eat.' But of that which is taken by the mouth and eaten, the Son 
 of God himself adds, ' This is my body.' But it is impossible that one 
 and the same word, in the same proposition, should at the same time have 
 both a literal and a figurative meaning." 
 
 But from this oral manducation, which, because it occurs only in the 
 Lord's Supper, is called sacramental, there is to be distinguished the 
 spiritual manducation. Form. Conc. (Sol. Dec, VII, 61): "There 
 is a twofold eating of the flesh of Christ; one is spiritual, of which 
 mainly Christ speaks in John 6, which occurs in no other way than in 
 spirit and in faith, in the hearing of and meditation upon the Gospel, 
 not less than when the Lord's Supper is received worthily by faith. 
 This spiritual manducation is useful and salutary in itself, and neces- 
 sary to the salvation of all Christians in all ages, without which spiritual 
 participation the sacramental manducation in the Lord's Supper, or that 
 which occurs with the mouth only, is not only not salutary, but preju- 
 dicial also, and is a cause of condemnation. This spiritual eating, 
 therefore, is nothing else than believing the preached Word of God, in 
 which Christ, true God and man, is offered to us, with all the benefits 
 which he procured by his flesh delivered up to death for us, and by his 
 blood shed for us. These benefits are the grace and mercy of God, the 
 forgiveness of sins, righteousness, and eternal life. He who hears these 
 things set forth from the Word of God, receives them by faith, applies 
 them to himself, and trusts wholly in this consolation ; he spiritually 
 eats the body and drinks the blood of Christ. The other manducation 
 of the body of Christ is oral and sacramental, when, in the Lord's Sup- 
 per, the true and substantial body and blood of Christ are orally re- 
 ceived and partaken of by all who eat and drink the consecrated bread 
 and wine." Thus the spiritual eating is not denied, but in the Lord's 
 Supper it only follows the sacramental manducation. Holl. (1130) 
 thus contrasts them : "The former (the spiritual eating) is common to 
 37 
 
570 MEANS OF GRACE. 
 
 all times; the latter is peculiar to the New Testament. The former is 
 unconnected with the Supper; the latter takes place only in the Supper. 
 The former may occur without the symbols; the latter, only through 
 the medium of external symbols. The former always contributes to our 
 •salvation ; the latter sometimes may occur to our condemnation. The 
 former apprehends the whole Christ, with all his benefits; the latter ap- 
 prehends only the body of Christ in and under the bread. The former 
 is metaphorical; the latter is literal, by virtue of a grammatical, not a 
 physical literalness." 
 
 The different senses in which the Lutherans and Calvinists employ 
 these terms are thus stated by Grh. (X, 303): "The Calvinists thus 
 define the sacramental eating: that we receive by the mouth the bread, 
 which is the Sacrament, i. e., only the sign, of the absent body of 
 Christ. We thus describe the sacramental eating: that we receive with 
 the mouth the bread which is the communion of the truly present body 
 of Christ. The Calvinists thus define spiritual manducation : that the 
 soul elevates itself, and its organ, viz., faith, to heaven, and there enjoys 
 the body and blood of Christ, i. <?., applies to itself the benefits derived 
 from the giving of his body and the shedding of his blood. We by no 
 means deny the application of the benefits of Christ by faith, i. e., the 
 spiritual eating and drinking of the body and blood of Christ, as spoken 
 of in John 6, but we have reference to the fruits and design of the Holy 
 Suppev, and therefore distinguish from that the sacramental manduca- 
 tion belonging to the form of the Eucharist. But when the sacramental 
 eating is called spiritual, this is meant to counteract all the carnal and 
 earthly ideas which human reason can conceive with regard to this 
 celestial mystery." 
 
 [8] Chmn. (de c. Dom., 20) : " If the union or presence of the body 
 of Christ in the bread were physical, constituted in a natural way and 
 after the manner of the things of this world, then the evident and mani- 
 fest manner of the sacramental manducation could be reasonably asked 
 for and could also be shown. For the manducation is the same in kind 
 as the union or presence of Christ in the Supper. But that union or 
 presence is not physical, constituted after the manner of the things of 
 this world. It is therefore more easy to show what sacramental eating 
 is not than what it is. It is plainly not physical, which consists in the 
 mastication, deglutition, and digestion of the substance which is eaten, 
 because the presence of Christ in the Supper is not natural, constituted 
 after the manner of the things of this world ; yet nevertheless not fig- 
 urative or feigned, but true and substantial, although it is effected by a 
 supernatural, celestial, and inscrutable mystery." Accordingly, there 
 
THE SACRAMENTAL MANDUCATION. 
 
 571 
 
 is indeed assumed an oral manducation of bread and wine, as of the 
 body and blood; but, because these substances are in their nature so 
 different, the mode of manducation in each is also distinguished; in the 
 bread and wine, namely, as physical and earthly things, the mode as- 
 sumed is physical; in the case of the body and blood, as heavenly 
 things, the mode of manducation assumed is hyperphy sical. Holl. 
 (1130): "The sacramental eating and drinking is an undivided single 
 action, by which at one and the same moment we eat the eucharistic 
 bread and the body of Christ sacramentally united to it. But the mode 
 of this one eating and drinking is twofold. For, although the terrestrial 
 and celestial object is received by one and the same organ, yet this is not 
 done in the same way. Bread and wine are received by the mouth im- 
 mediately and naturally: the body and blood of Christ are received me- 
 diately and supernaturally." The physical and hyperphysical mode are 
 thus described by Holl. (1130): "The former is that by which food, 
 taken into the mouth, is passed into the stomach, digested, and ejected. 
 The latter is that by which food that is offered is, indeed, received 
 through the mouth into the body, but is not digested and ejected in a 
 natural way. Angels ate (Gen. 18 : 8), and Christ ate after his resur- 
 rection ; but it was not an ordinary, natural eating, nor was the food 
 digested in a natural manner. But as the earth absorbs water in one 
 way and the sun in another, so also was that food not digested in a nat- 
 ural way." 
 
 Quen. (IV, 204) : " We must distinguish between the manducation 
 itself, and its form, definition, and properties, on the one hand, and the 
 accidents and consequents of manducation on the other. We cannot 
 say : " The body of Christ is literally eaten, therefore it is masticated 
 by the teeth,' etc. For it is not essential to literal eating and drinking, 
 in general, that the meat and drink should -pass by means of deglutition 
 into the stomach, for the above stated accidents and consequents pertain 
 only to the physical mode of manducation and not to the hyperphysi- 
 cal." The physical mode of eating the body and blood is rejected, 
 under the name also of Capernaitic manducation (according to John 6: 
 26). Form. Conc. (Sol. Dec, VII, 64) : " That command of Christ 
 (' take, eat'), when all the circumstances are rightly considered, must 
 be understood of an oral, and yet not of a -gross, carnal, Capernaitic, 
 but of a supernatural and incomprehensible manducation of the body of 
 Christ." 
 
 [9] Grh. (X, 116) : " The sacramental presence and union is effected 
 in such a way that, according to the appointment of our Saviour him- 
 self, the body of Christ is united to the consecrated bread, as a divinely 
 
572 MEANS OF GRACE. 
 
 appointed medium ; and, to the consecrated wine as a medium also di- 
 vinely appointed, the blood of Christ is united in a manner incompre- 
 hensible to us; so that in a sublime mystery, with the blood, by one 
 sacramental eating, we take and eat the body of Christ, and with the 
 wine, in one sacramental drinking, we take and drink the blood of 
 Christ." lb. (302): "We teach, therefore, that in the Holy Supper 
 we do not receive the bread, alone and by itself, nor the body of Christ, 
 alone and by itself; . . . but, that with the wine the blood of Christ is 
 received, and this in consequence of the mystical and sacramental union 
 of the bread and the body. and of the wine and the blood of Christ, 
 which has its origin in the appointment of the true and omnipotent 
 Christ, but which cannot be understood, nor should it be investigated 
 by human reason." 
 
 Hfrffr. (517) : " The sacramental union is such a real and true 
 conjunction of the consecrated bread with the body of Christ, and of 
 the consecrated wine with his blood, in which, by virtue of the institu- 
 tion and ordination of Christ, in the administration and reception of the 
 Holy Supper, the true body and blood of Christ are taken, eaten, and 
 drank together with the bread and wine." 
 
 Quen. (IV, 181) : " The complex subject [viz., the rovro in the 
 words of the institution] signifies that a terrestrial and a celestial object 
 are conjointly given to be eaten and drank ; but what are conjointly 
 given, in a real presentation, these are also united after their own pecu- 
 liar manner : now, in the Holy Supper the eucharistic bread and the 
 body of Christ, and also the wine and the blood of Christ, are conjointly 
 given in a real presentation ; therefore they are also really joined in a 
 sacramental union." 
 
 Holl. (1120): "The sacramental union of the terrestrial and the 
 celestial object implies the mutual presence and communion of the bread 
 and the body, also that of the wine and the blood of Christ, so that the 
 consecrated bread is the vehicle of the body, and the consecrated wine 
 is the vehicle of the blood of Christ." 
 
 In order to avoid all misconception, it is added with special emphasis 
 that only the body and blood of Christ, and not the whole Christ, body 
 and soul, are united with the bread and wine ; hence there is a differ- 
 ence between the presence of Christ and the participation of the body 
 and blood of Christ. 
 
 Quen. (IV, 200): " It is one thing that the whole Christ is present 
 in the Holy Supper, and another that the whole Christ or the celestial 
 object is united with the element of bread and wine, and thus also the 
 whole is sacramentally eaten. The former we affirm, the latter we 
 
THE REFORMED DOCTRINE OF THE LORD'S SUPPER. 573 
 
 deny. For we say that the botly of Christ only is united with the 
 bread, and the blood with the wine, and sacramentally received by the 
 mouth of the body, but that the whole Christ is received spiritually by 
 the mouth of faith." 
 
 For the difference in the doctrine gf the Lord's Supper between the 
 Lutheran and the Reformed, see Form. Conc, VII, 2-9. 
 
 Grh. (X, 184) states the difference as follows: " Our opponents con- 
 tend (1) that the body of Christ is substantially present only in heaven ; 
 hence they draw an argument against the presence of his body in the 
 Supper from the article of his ascension; (2) that Christ in his human 
 nature is not present on earth, but that he was taken to heaven, and 
 will remain there until the last day; (3) that presence in many places 
 is opposed to the nature of a true body ; hence they argue against our 
 opinion from the properties of a true body ; (4) that the body of Christ 
 was as much present to Abraham and to the godly of the Old Testament 
 as he is to us in the sacrament of the Eucharist ; (5) that the eating of 
 his body can be performed alone by faith soaring to heaven ; (6) that 
 the body of Christ is communicated and united to us by the operation 
 of the Holy Spirit; yet it remains in heaven, where it is received until 
 the last day; (7) that the presence is asserted not on account of the 
 bread, but on accourt of man (according to which they oppose the means 
 to the end, which, nevertheless, are subordinates); (8) that the sacra- 
 mental union consists in a mere form and analogy ; which they thus ex- 
 plain, that the bread is a sign, figure, and representation of the body, 
 which is absent, according to its essence ; (9) that those eating un- 
 worthily do not receive the body and blood of Christ, but only the ex- 
 ternal symbols, viz., bread and wine; (10) besides the natural eating of 
 the bread, and the spiritual eating of the body of Christ by faith, there 
 is no sacramental eating of the body of Christ; (11) that the body of 
 Christ is neither locally nor illocally present ; (12) that the body of 
 Christ is neither visibly nor invisibly present ; (13) that the body and 
 blood of Christ, before his return to judge the world, is neither ordi- 
 narily nor extraordinarily present on earth, where the Supper is admin- 
 istered. But how or in what manner may these false hypotheses be 
 reconciled with the true opinion of the true, real, and substantial pres- 
 ence of the body and blood of Christ in the Supper? How great must 
 be their effrontery, to assert that the question is only concerning the 
 mode of the presence, and not of the presence itself, when we have al- 
 ways protested that we will not dispute with any one about the mode, 
 for that is unknown to human reason." 
 
 [10] Hfrffr. (517) : The sacramental union is not (1) a transub- 
 
574 MEANS OF GRACE. 
 
 stantiation of the bread into the body of Christ, for to a union at least 
 two things are necessary ; (2) it is not a consubstantiation or commix- 
 ture of the substances, but in both the bread and wine the substance of 
 the body and blood of Christ remains unmixed : (3) nor is it a local or 
 durable adhesion or conjunction to. the bread and wine apart from the 
 use of the Supper ; (4) nor the inclusion of some small corpuscle lying 
 hid under the bread (impanation) ; (5) nor is it, finally, a personal 
 union of the bread and body of Christ, such as exists between the Son 
 of God and the assumed humanity."* 
 
 [11] Grh. (X, 261): "The form of this Sacrament consists in an 
 action, and in one which Christ and the apostles observed in its admin- 
 istration, and not only for their own example, but they also, by a com- 
 mand, charged it to be observed. The three sacramental acts belonging 
 to the form and integrity of this Sacrament are gathered from the de- 
 scription of the Evangelists : (1) Christ took the bread and blessed it ; 
 (2) he gave and distributed the broken bread to the disciples ; (3) the 
 disciples received and ate the consecrated bread. . . . There are then 
 three sacramental acts : (1) The consecration of the bread and cup ; (2) 
 the distribution of the consecrated bread and cup ; (3) the sacramental 
 eating and drinking of the distributed bread and cup." Form. Conc. 
 (Sol. Dec, VII, 83): " But this consecration or recitation of the words 
 of the institution of Christ does not alone constitute the Sacrament, if the 
 whole action of the Supper, as ordained by Christ, be not observed, e. g., 
 when the consecrated bread is not distributed, received, or partaken of, 
 but is shut up, or offered as a sacrifice, or carried about in procession. 
 
 [* The late Dr. Krauth has given the following tabular statement, which will 
 show how the Lutheran doctrine has often been mistaken for consubstantiation : 
 The theories of presence may be thus classified : 
 "I. Subjective: 1. Natural — Zwingli. 
 
 2. Supernatural — Calvin. 
 II. Objective: 1. Monistic; one substance only really present — the body 
 and blood : Roman Catholic transub stantiation. 
 2. Dualistic ; the two substances really present — bread 
 and wine, body and blood. 
 
 a. Substantial conjunction of the two — -consubstantiation, 
 
 impanation, as held by John of Paris and Rupert ; 
 falsely charged on the Lutheran Church. 
 
 b. Sacramental conjunction — mystical mediating relation 
 
 of the natural (bread and wine) to the supernatural 
 (body and blood), each unchanged in its substance, 
 and without substantial conjunction : the Lutheran 
 view." Johnson's Cyclopaedia, Consubstantiation.] 
 
THE SACRAMENTAL CONSECRATION. 575 
 
 For the command of Christ (do this) which embraces the whole action, 
 must be wholly and inviolably observed. Rule : Nothing can be called 
 a Sacrament unless administered as instituted by Christ, or according 
 to the manner divinely appointed." 
 
 From what has been said it follows that the practice of the Roman 
 Catholic Church in excluding the laity from the participation of the cup, 
 is utterly rejected, and it is maintained " that as eating is an essential 
 part of the Sacrament, so also is drinking ; he who receives it in one kind 
 only does not partake of the whole Sacramant, but only of a part." 
 Quen. (IV, 226, 227). And yet Quen. himself remarks (IV, 225): 
 " The laity in the papacy do not on this account sustain injury to their 
 souls, because they are deprived of the cup of the Lord ; for the sin be- 
 longs to the priests, and only the suffering of injury to the people ; and 
 although they do not derive the benefit of the cup by partaking of the 
 cup, because it is denied to them, yet God will make amends for this in 
 some other way, and relieve their misery." 
 
 Quen. (IV, 179): " The consecration consists (a) in the separation 
 of the external elements, the bread and wine, from a common and ordi- 
 nary use; (b) in the benediction, or setting them apart for sacred use, 
 as appointed in the Holy Supper, by solemn prayers and thanksgiving ; 
 (c) in the sacramental union of the bread and wine with the body and 
 blood of Christ, so that the consecrated bread becomes the communion 
 of the body, and the consecrated wine becomes the communion of the 
 blood of Christ." (For "by virtue of the Word the element becomes 
 a Sacrament, without the accession of which it remains a mere ele- 
 ment." Cat. Maj.,V, 10.) But " this sacramental union itself does 
 not take place except in the distribution, for the elements, bread and 
 wine, do not become portative media (irpoatiepo^eva) of the body and 
 blood of Christ, until during the distribution they are eaten and 
 drank." Hutt. (Loc. Com., 726): " The Romanists, ancient as well 
 as modern, insist upon it that there is a hidden magical power in the 
 pronunciation of those four words, Hoc est corpus meum, by the force 
 of which the bread is essentially changed into the body, and the wine 
 into the blood of Christ. So there are even some among ourselves who 
 dream that when the words of the institution have been recited, there 
 results a permanent sacramental union of the bread with the body and 
 of the wine with the blood. . . . Both errors result from the false pre- 
 mise, in which it is assumed that the sacramental union depends upon 
 the force and efficacy of the recitation of the words of the institution. 
 The Church, purified, correcting this error, teaches that no sacramental 
 union takes place until the external use is added, which consists in eat- 
 
576 MEANS OF GRACE. 
 
 ing and drinking; so that if the words of the institution were recited a 
 thousand times, and this use, i. e., the eating and drinking, were not 
 added, there would still be no sacramental union of the bread with the 
 body or of the wine with the blood of Christ. Therefore there is no 
 reason for the anxious inquiry, Where are the consecrated wafers to be 
 kept, if there be no use for them ; or what is to be done if there be more 
 consecrated wafers than communicants ? For they are to be stored away 
 and kept for use upon a subsequent occasion, and in the same place 
 where the other unconsecrated wafers are kept ; and this for the reasons 
 already assigned." 
 
 Grh. (X, 270) : " But since Christ, in the institution of the Holy 
 Supper, expressly commanded us to do in its administration what he did, 
 it follows that the minister of the Church, in celebrating the Supper, 
 sho.uld repeat the words of the institution, and consecrate the bread and 
 wine in this manner, and distribute it to the communicants. . . . This 
 consecration of the Eucharist is (1) not a magical incarnation, essenti- 
 ally transmuting, by the power of certain words, the bread into the body 
 and the wine into the blood of Christ ; nor (2) is it only the historical 
 repetition of the institution; . . . but it is (3) an efficacious dyLaajiog- 
 (sanctification) by which, according to the command, ordination, and in- 
 stitution of Christ, sanctification is, as it were, carried over from the 
 first Supper to the Supper at the present day : and the external ele- 
 ments are destined to this sacred use, so that with these the body and 
 blood of Christ are distributed." 
 
 We do not, indeed, attribute to the recitation of the words of the in- 
 stitution such power as to make the body and blood of Christ present by 
 some hidden efficacy inherent in the words, much less essentially to 
 change the external elements ; but we sincerely believe and profess that 
 the presence of the body and blood of Christ depends entirely upon the 
 will and promise of Christ, and upon the perpetually enduring efficacy 
 of the original institution ; nevertheless we also add that the repetition 
 of that primeval institution, made by the minister of the Church, is not 
 merely historical and doctrinal, but also consecratory ; by which, accor- 
 ding to the appointment of Christ, the external symbols are truly and 
 efficaciously set apart to sacred use, and in the very act of distribution 
 become the communion of the body and blood of Christ." . . . Form. 
 Conc. (Sol. Dec, VII, 77): " It is not our doing, nor our pronouncing, 
 but the command and appointment of Christ, that cause the bread to be- 
 come the body and the wine to become the blood of Christ, and this is 
 continually taking place from the first institution of the Supper to the 
 end of the world : and by our ministry these things are daily distrib- 
 uted." 
 
SACRAMENTAL UNION ONLY DURING DISTRIBUTION, ETC. 577 
 
 It is also a matter of dispute between the Lutherans and Romanists 
 whether the consecrated host should be adored. Grh. says, in regard 
 to this (X, 353): " When the matter of the adoration of the host is dis- 
 cussed with the Romanists, the question, properly speaking, is not (1) 
 whether Christ, the God-man, who is really present in the administra- 
 tion of the Holy Supper, and distributes to us his body and blood by 
 means of the bread and wine, is to be adored ; for this we not only gladly 
 admit, but also urge and inculcate ; . . . (2) nor is the question strictly 
 this, whether very special reverence is to be paid to this Sacrament, ac- 
 cording to the rule of the divine Word ; for we ourselves teach that the 
 body and blood of Christ, which are presented to us in this Sacrament 
 by means of external symbols, are to be distinguished from common 
 food and drink ; . . . but (3) there is properly also no question here as 
 to the external reverence which is shown in the distribution and reception 
 of the Eucharist, for we ourselves teach that profound reverence should 
 be shown by the external deportment. For he who truly and heartily 
 believes that Christ himself, truly present in the administration of the 
 Eucharist, feeds us with his body and blood, will manifest his profound 
 faith and devotion by bowing his knee, and yielding external reverence. 
 . . . Concerning these matters, therefore, there is no question between 
 us and the Romanists; but the three points in controversy are particu- 
 larly these : (1) The Romanists maintain that the Sacrament of the Eu- 
 charist, or the whole of that which was appointed by the Lord to be re- 
 ceived, is to be adored with the worship of latria. On the other hand, 
 since the Eucharist consists of two things, a terrestrial and a celestial, 
 we teach that adoration is not to be addressed to the terrestrial elements 
 of bread and wine, lest we worship the creature as well as the Creator, 
 but unto Christ, who is God and man, and who, being truly present in 
 the administration, distributes to us his body and blood. (2) The Ro- 
 manists, when they contend for the worship, adoration, and veneration 
 of the Sacrament, do not particularly refer to this, that Christ, who is 
 God and man, should be adored in the administration of the Holy Sup- 
 per, or in its use as divinely appointed, but they labor to establish the 
 adoration of the bread aside from the use instituted and commanded by 
 Christ ; when, namely the bread is carried about in processions. But 
 we maintain that the bread, when not used as appointed by Christ, is not 
 the body of Christ, and so artolatry (bread-worship) is committed when 
 bread is adored in those solemn processions. (3) The Romanists are 
 particularly solicitous about the external worship of the Eucharist, as 
 that it be honored by being kept in a splendid repository, etc. . . . 
 But we are particularly solicitous in the use of the Eucharist as ap- 
 
578 , MEANS OF GRACE. 
 
 pointed by Christ concerning the inner and spiritual worship, upon 
 which genuine external indications of internal reverence spontaneously 
 follow." 
 
 Quen. (IV, 233): " The Lord's Supper consists in a sacramental ac- 
 tion, viz., in the consecration, distribution, eating, and drinking, and so 
 we deny that, aside from the use of distribution, eating, and drinking, 
 the body and blood of Christ are permanently united under the forms of 
 bread and wine after the consecration ; and we teach that the elevation, 
 carrying about, and adoration of the consecrated wafers is not the wor- 
 ship of Christ (KpiorolaTpeia^ but the worship of bread (aprolaTpeiay 
 (234): "That the sacrament of the Supper is not a permanent thing, 
 but a temporary action, is proved (1) From the description ivhich Christ 
 gives of it. Whatever is described by Christ himself as to its form, by 
 means of actions, and has its complement and perfection in them, that 
 is not a permanent thing, but an action. But the sacrament of the Eu- 
 charist is described by Christ himself, as to its form, by actions, such as 
 blessing, distribution, eating, drinking, and has its complement and per- 
 fection in these. Therefore, etc. (2) From the assertion of Paul, 1 Cor. 
 10 : 16. * The bread which we break,' i. e., which we distribute to be 
 eaten, ' is the communion of the body of Christ.' Whatever bread, 
 therefore, is not broken or distributed, that is not the communion 
 (aoLvuvia) or participation of the body of Christ. (3) From thenature of the 
 Sacrament. No Sacrament, aside from its use as divinely appointed, is 
 truly a Sacrament, therefore the Eucharist is not. The reason is, an in- 
 stitution is not observed except in its use ; but where an institution is not 
 observed, there there is no Sacrament. A Sacrament is entire through 
 aggregation ; if, therefore, one of the aggregates or connected parts be 
 wanting, there is no Sacrament." 
 
 [12] Gkh. (X, 397): " Faith does not belong to the substance of the 
 Eucharist, therefore it is not on account of the faith of those coming to 
 the Lord's Supper that the bread is the communion of the body of Christ, 
 nor does the bread cease to be the communion of the body of Christ on 
 account of their unbelief." Hence, "hypocrites and the unworthy also 
 partake of the substance of the Sacrament, although they do not receive 
 its benefits. 1 Cor. 11: 27." The sacramental manducation is theirs, 
 but " not the spiritual, for this occurs through faith to eternal life ;" 
 rather, they partake of the Holy Supper unto condemnation, while be- 
 lievers receive a blessing. 
 
 Form. Conc. (Sol. Dec, VII, 63): "The godly receive the body 
 and blood of Christ as a certain pledge and confirmation that their sins 
 are surely pardoned ; . . . but the wicked receive the same body and 
 
THE WORTHY RECEPTION OF THE EUCHARIST. 579 
 
 the same blood of Christ also with their mouth unto judgment and con- 
 demnation." Quen, (IV, 2o0): " The antithesis of the Calvinists, who 
 maintain that the unworthy and hypocrites receive only the half of the 
 Sacrament, viz., the external signs, but not the whole Sacrament, i. e., 
 they are not made partakers of the body and blood of Christ in the 
 Holy Supper, but receive only the mere and empty signs." 
 
 Form. Coxc. (Sol. Dec, VII, 68): " But it must also be distinctly 
 declared who are the unworthy guests in this Holy Supper; those, 
 namely, who come to the table of the Lord without true penitence and 
 contrition, without true faith and a serious determination to amend their 
 lives; these bring upon themselves condemnation, i. <?., temporal and 
 eternal punishment, by their unworthy oral manducation,and make them- 
 selves guilty of the body and blood of Christ. . . . But the worthy 
 guests in the Holy Supper are those Christians, weak in faith, timid, 
 desponding, who, while they revolve in their minds the greatness and 
 multitude of their sins, are alarmed; who, in reflecting upon their great 
 impurity, judge themselves unworthy of this most precious treasure and 
 of the benefits of Christ ; who feel and deplore the infirmity of their 
 faith : these are the worthy guests. . . . Their worthiness, therefore, 
 consists neither in the greatness nor in the weakness of their faith, but 
 in the merit of Christ." The question here naturally arises, whether 
 all who live in the Church are to be admitted to the Holy Supper? 
 Geh. (X, 881); " Xor are all Christians promiscuously to be admitted 
 to the Lord's Supper ; but, according to the rule of Paul, only those 
 who examine themselves, 1 Cor. 11: 28; i. e., those who condemn 
 themselves, v. 31 ; those who distinguish the body of the Lord from 
 other ordinary food, v. 29 ; and who show forth the death of the Lord, 
 v. 26. Therefore all those are excluded who are either unwilling or 
 unable to examine themselves, as (1) those who are defiled with heresy, 
 i. e., who pertinaciously and refractorily persevere in error concerning the 
 foundation of the faith, neglecting all kinds of admonition ; for, since 
 by their heresy they cut themselves off from the fellowship of the true 
 Church, they also cannot at all be admitted to the Sacraments, which 
 are the blessings peculiar to the Church; such are, e. g., those who 
 pertinaciously deny the true and substantial presence of the body and 
 blood of Christ in the Holy Supper, Matt. 7:6; Phil. 3: 2 ; 1 Cor. 11 : 
 29. . . . (2) Notorious sinners. . . . (3) The excommunicated. . . . 
 (4) The possessed, maniacs, the demented. . . . (5) Infamous persons." 
 
 [13] Form. Coxc. (Sol. Dec, VII, 32) : (Luther), " I confess, con- 
 cerning the Sacrament of the altar, that the true body and blood of 
 Christ are orally eaten and drank in the bread and wine, even if the 
 
580 MEANS OF GRACE. 
 
 ministers who distribute the Lord's Supper, or those who receive it, do 
 not believe, or otherwise abuse the Holy Supper. For the Lord's Sup- 
 per is not based upon the faith or unbelief of men, but upon the Word 
 of God and his appointment." 
 
 But the Lord's Supper is always to be distributed only by the min- 
 ister. Quen. (IV, 177): "The dispenser of this Sacrament is none 
 other than the minister of the Church, so that its administration is not 
 to be intrusted to any private person, even in a case of necessity . . . 
 (a) Because Christ committed the administration to the apostles, (b) 
 Because he dispensed it, representing the person of the administrant. 
 (c) Because he Committed the administration of the Sacraments, as well 
 as the preaching of the Word, to the apostles, Matt. 28: 19. (d) Be- 
 cause ministers are the servants and ambassadors of Christ, 2 Cor. 5 : 
 19. (e) Because they are stewards of the mysteries of God, 1 Cor. 4: 
 1. (f) Because the necessity of the Eucharist is not absolute, or such 
 as that of Baptism ; it is evident, therefore, that it should not be admin- 
 istered, rather than to be improperly distributed. (Comp. 1 Cor. 15, at 
 the end.) When, therefore, regular ministers of the Church are not at 
 hand, the saying of Augustine is applicable: 'Believe, and thou hast 
 eaten.' It is necessary, also, that the minister be orthodox, or a minister 
 of the true Church, for the Holy Eucharist cannot be lawfully or legiti- 
 mately asked or received from any other than an orthodox minister." 
 But Cotta remarks, upon Gerhard's statement (X, 21) : "In a case 
 of such necessity, where death seems immediately impending, if a pastor 
 cannot be procured, and the dying person earnestly desire to enjoy the 
 Sacrament, many of our theologians maintain that the Holy Eucharist 
 can be administered even by a layman. Let it suffice that I mention, 
 among these, Jn. Gallus and Tileman Hesshuss." 
 
 [14] Aug. Conf. (de Missa, III, 30) : "Christ commands us to do 
 this in memory of him; wherefore the Lord's Supper was instituted, 
 that faith, in those who partake of the Sacrament, may call to mind the 
 benefits which it receives through Christ, and may encourage and con- 
 sole the timid conscience. For, to remember and feel the benefits which 
 are truly presented to us, is to remember Christ." Holl. (1138): 
 " The commemoration and annunciation of the death of Christ are made 
 in true faith, when we consider and believe that his body was sacrificed 
 as a victim for us on the altar of the cross. But the application of faith, 
 as far as it relates to the body of Christ, is called the spiritual eating of 
 the body of Christ, without which a mere oral manducation does not 
 produce the saving benefit of the Eucharist, because all the spiritual 
 benefits are received by faith." 
 
IS THE LORD'S SUPPER A SACRIFICE? 581 
 
 Quex. (IV, 237) : " The Eucharist is not an external, visible, and 
 properly so-called propitiatory sacrifice, or a procurer of all kinds of 
 benefits, in which the body and blood of Christ are truly and literally 
 offered to God under the visible form of bread and wine, but it is only 
 a commemoration of the propitiatory sacrifice once offered by Christ 
 upon the altar of the cross." Holl. (1139): "Observe II. The word 
 sacrifice may be used either literally or figuratively. Figuratively, it 
 is used (1) for every act which is done, that we may cleave unto God 
 in holy fellowship, and having in view the end that we may become 
 truly happy. (2) For the worship of the New Testament and the 
 preaching of the Gospel, Rom. 15: 16; Phil. 2: 17. (3) For kind- 
 ness and the works of charity towards our neighbor, Phil. 4:8; Heb. 
 13: 16. (4) For prayers and giving of thanks to God, Heb. 13 : 15; 
 Rev. 5:8.. . . We do not deny that the mass, or the celebration of 
 the Eucharist, may be figuratively called a sacrifice, because (1) it is a 
 work which is done, that we may cleave unto God in holy fellowship. 
 (2) It is not the last part of the worship of the New Testament. (3) 
 Formerly, when the Eucharist was celebrated, gifts were usually offered 
 which fell to the use of the ministers of the Church and of the poor. (4) 
 The administration of the Holy Supper was joined with prayers and giv- 
 ing of thanks. (5) It was instituted in memory of the sacrifice of 
 Christ . . . offered upon the altar of the cross. Observe III. ^Ve 
 must distinguish between a sacrifice considered materially and consid- 
 ered formally. If we view it materially, in the Eucharist the sacrifice 
 is the same in number as that which was upon the cross; or, in other 
 words, the object and the substance are just the same, that is, the victim 
 is the same as that offered on the cross. But if we consider the sacri- 
 fice formally, or as the act of sacrificing, then, although the victim is 
 one and the same, yet the act or the immolation, which takes place in 
 the Eucharist, is not the same with that which took place upon the 
 cross. For upon the cross the oblation was made through the true suf- 
 fering and death of an immolated living subject, without which there 
 could not in any way be a sacrifice, properly speaking; in the Eucharist, 
 however, the oblation is made through prayers and through the com- 
 memoration of the death or of the sacrifice that was offered on the 
 cross." 
 
 [15] Grh. (X, 364): " The design and benefits of the Holy Supper 
 are very many in number, inestimable as regards their utility, and in- 
 conceivable in importance. For, when we receive in the Holy Supper 
 the literal body of the Son of God himself, crucified for us, and his own 
 literal blood shed on the altar of the cross for our sins, it plainly follows 
 
582 MEANS OF GRACE. * 
 
 from this that all things which Christ meritoriously procured for us, by 
 delivering his body and shedding his blood, are applied, conferred upon, 
 and sealed to us in the salutary use of this Sacrament. . . . But 
 Christ embraces all and each of those benefits with wonderful brevity in 
 the words of the institution, when he declares that his same body is of- 
 fered to us to be eaten which was broken for us on the cross, . . . and 
 when he commands us to do this in memory of him." 
 
 [16] Baptism and the Lord's Supper are thus distinguished : The 
 former is the Sacrament of initiation, the latter the Sacrament of con- 
 firmation. Grh. (X, 2) : " By Baptism we are regenerated and re- 
 newed ; by the Lord's Supper we are fed and nourished unto eternal 
 life. In Baptism, especially that of infants, faith is kindled by the 
 Holy Spirit ; in the use of the Supper it is increased, confirmed, and 
 sealed. By Baptism we are grafted into Christ; by the salutary use of 
 the Lord's Supper we receive a spiritual increase in this relation. By 
 Baptism we are received into the divine covenant ; by the use of the 
 Eucharist we are preserved in it, or, when we fall from it by sins against 
 conscience, we are restored to it by true penitence." 
 
 Id. (304): "As Baptism regenerates not only the soul, but the whole 
 man, in soul and body, so with the body and blood of Christ not only the 
 soul but also the body, or the whole man in body and soul is nourished 
 unto life spiritual, celestial, and eternal; when, therefore, the Eucharist 
 is called the food of the soul, this is to be understood in an inclusive, 
 not an exclusive sense. And if, indeed, the body of Christ is especially 
 only the food of the soul, yet it does not hence follow that it is not re- 
 ceived with the bodily mouth ; because the Word of God is the food of 
 the soul (Heb. 5: 12), and yet it is received with the bodily ears, Rom. 
 10 : 14 ; now, just in the same way the body of Christ is received with 
 the bodily mouth, that the nutrition of the soul may be the more effica- 
 cious through the union of the bread and the body." 
 
 Cat. Maj. (V, 23) : " By Baptism we are at first regenerated, but 
 nevertheless the old and vicious covering of flesh and blood adheres to 
 man. Now, there are here many impediments and assaults by which 
 we are so severely tried, on the part of the world and of the devil, that 
 we often grow weary and weak, and sometimes even fall into the filth of 
 sin. Hence this Sacrament is given to us, that by its use our faith may 
 again restore and refresh its strength, that it may not retreat or finally 
 fall in this contest, but become daily stronger and stronger. For the 
 new life is so constituted that it may continually increase and gather 
 strength as it advances." 
 
 [17] Holl. (1138) combines both under the general name of evan- 
 
583 
 
 gelical grace, which is communicated to us through the use of the Holy 
 Supper. " Christ's design in offering his body to be eaten by us . . . 
 is, that evangelical grace or the divine grace, promised and offered to us 
 in the gospel, may be applied and sealed to us individually. When we 
 attentively consider this, the act of applying grace becomes very clearly 
 known. God promises through regenerating grace to bestow faith upon 
 all. This regenerating grace, and its effect, viz., faith, God confirms, 
 strengthens and increases through the Sacrament of the Eucharist. 
 Moreover, he who receives the body and blood of the Lord may be most 
 firmly assured that the promise of the gospel belongs to him individ- 
 ually. . . . Next, through justifying grace God forgives the sins of the 
 regenerate and imputes to them the righteousness of Christ ; which jus- 
 tifying grace and forgiveness of sins are sealed in the Holy Supper. 
 For, when we receive in the Holy Supper the very body of Christ 
 which was delivered up to death for us . . . then we are positively as- 
 sured, as by a seal of the New Testament, that the forgiveness of sins 
 is imparted, bestowed upon, and applied to us who believe in Christ. 
 Through indwelling grace God graciously unites himself with us, which 
 mystical union is rendered more close and firm by the eating of the 
 body and the drinking of the blood of Christ, John 6: 5Q. It is, more- 
 over, a proof of ineffable love, that Christ, not content with being spirit- 
 ually embraced by us through faith, in addition comes to us in his body 
 and blood through a special appropriation, and thus unites himself both 
 with our body and soul. Through renovating grace spiritual strength is 
 conferred upon us, so that we bring forth the fruits of righteousness. 
 In the Holy Supper we are more intimately united with Christ, as the 
 vine, so that in him we, the branches, may bring forth more abundant 
 fruit. By preserving grace we are shielded from sin and refreshed with 
 consolation. The sacrament of the Supper is a daily medicine against 
 sin (Ambrose). And, just as complete refreshment or nourishment for 
 the body consists in food, which is the dry aliment, and drink, which is 
 the moist aliment; so, in the Eucharist Christ is offered to us both as 
 food and drink, lest we might think that we lacked anything needful 
 for our complete alimony or spiritual nutrition (Augustine). Through 
 glorifying grace blissful immortality is conferred upon us, whose signs 
 or pledges are the body and blood of Christ, received in the Holy Sup- 
 per." 
 
 [18] Holl. (1139): " Being united through the Holy Supper with 
 Christ, the head, they are also united with one another as members of 
 the mystical body, and thus the Eucharist is the basis of love between 
 us and our neighbor, 1 Cor. 10 : 17. Whence, also, it is a mark of 
 
584 MEANS OF GRACE. 
 
 ecclesiastical fellowship and a token of the Church with which we com- 
 municate in faith. (Grh. (X, 371): * We testify that we approve the 
 doctrine which is taught in the Church in which we, together with others, 
 eat one Eucharistic bread and drink from one common cup')." The 
 Dogmaticians usually distinguish between the principal designs or fruits 
 and the less principal or secondary. As the latter, Quen. (IV, 184) 
 enumerates : "(a) The remembrance and commemoration of the death 
 of Christ and of the benefits thereby acquired, Luke 22 : 19 ; 1 Cor. 11 : 
 24, 25 (avdjuvTjaig signifies both the remembrance of any one in thought, 
 and the commemoration in words). (6) The separation of Christians 
 from Pagans and Jews, (c) The more intimate communion in Christ, 
 of the members of the Church, reciprocally." 
 
 It follows from the conception of the Eucharist that (1) as a rule, it 
 should be administered in the public congregation, and not in private, 
 unless in a case of necessity. When, moreover, the Apol. says (XII, 
 6): " We do nothing contrary to the Catholic Church, though we ad- 
 minister only public mass or communion. For no private masses are 
 now administered in the Greek parishes" . . . this is not stated in 
 opposition to the private use of the Lord's Supper, but in opposition to 
 the solitary masses of the Romish Church, from which the congregation 
 is entirely excluded. (2) That the frequent use of the Eucharist is not 
 only allowable, but should be commended. 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 Of the Church. 
 § 56. Of the Church [1] in a Wider and Narrower Sense. 
 
 IN view of the efficiency which God has communicated to the 
 means of grace appointed by him, it may naturally be ex- 
 pected (Is. 55 : 10 ; 59 : 21) that through their instrumentality 
 there should arise a community of such as really embrace the sav- 
 ing grace offered to them. These recognize as their Lord and their 
 head, Christ, who, by giving himself up to death, has not only 
 made a congregation of the redeemed possible, but preserves the 
 same, presides over it as head and king, and procures for it every- 
 thing that is necessary and serviceable for its existence and pros- 
 
THE CHURCH IN A NARROWER AND WIDER SENSE. 585 
 
 perity. [2] This congregation is most intimately united to him, 
 and its members are also most intimately joined together by the 
 bond of a common faith, a common hope, and reciprocal love ; [3] 
 so that all who have become so united and believing constitute a 
 single, great communion, which we call the Church. [4] To the 
 Church belong all those who have the same faith and the same 
 hope, however widely they may be separated one from another 
 by space and time. The Church embraces, therefore, not only 
 those now living, but, as well, those who have died in the faith; 
 and between both there is only this difference, that the latter 
 have already reached the goal, 1jie former are still striving after 
 it (Church militant, triumphant). [5] There is, therefore, only 
 one such communion, because there is only one head to whom all 
 are subject, and only one faith through which they can be saved. 
 This communion we then call holy, because in it the Holy Ghost 
 is operating, to sanctify it ; catholic, because, however widely the 
 members of the Church are scattered, yet at all times and in all 
 places the same faith is confessed ; apostolic, because its faith, 
 resting upon that proclaimed by the apostles, has never, in the 
 course of time, been changed. [6] 
 
 Only those who belong to this communion are certain of their 
 salvation, for the only way of salvation lies in the faith which is 
 the faith of this communion {extra ecclesiam nulla salus). [7] To 
 this communion, moreover, the promise is given that it shall 
 endure for all time, [8] and it can never fall into error, because 
 in the Word of God it possesses the eternal truth. [9] 
 
 If, moreover, the members of this communion are joined to- 
 gether by the like hope and the like faith, it is just as natural, 
 as it is desired by God, that those who dwell together in the same 
 place and at the same time, should combine in a close, visible 
 community ; so that thus the one, universal Church should take 
 the form of several particular churches (ecclesia universalis — par- 
 ticulars), [10] and its actual existence be also externally recog- 
 nized by such combination. It then becomes the duty of each 
 such congregation to draw others also into the same saving fellow- 
 ship with Christ, and for this end to employ the means of grace by 
 which individuals can be gained. The particular [or individual] 
 Church will then have to count all such as belonging to it, who 
 83 
 
586 OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 unite themselves to it, though it be only by an outward profes- 
 sion ; for, first, as it cannot, like God, look into the heart, it has 
 no means whereby to determine whether any individual has in- 
 deed inwardly followed the call addressed to him ; secondly, it 
 can still always hope, in regard to those who at first have only 
 outwardly accepted the call, that, through the power of the divine- 
 Word and Sacraments, they will still in time give inward heed 
 to it. Concerning the particular church we cannot, however, 
 assert so unconditionally, that it is a congregation of believers, 
 i. e., of such as have accepted the saving grace offered to them ; 
 to it, therefore, the definition of the Church thus far given, viz., 
 the communion of believers, does not apply, for in the midst of 
 it there may be those who have not yet accepted the offered 
 grace. While we count only those as belonging to the Church, 
 as the communion of believers, whose treatment of the offered 
 grace is what it should be, we must count as belonging to the 
 particular Church all those also who stand only in outward rela- 
 tion to and in connection with it. And thus we see ourselves 
 driven to admit a twofold conception of the Church, viz., the 
 Church in the narrow sense, composed of only true believers, 
 and the Church in the wider sense, by which we understand the 
 congregation of those who have joined themselves together in 
 the same confession in the use of the Sacraments (ecclesia stride 
 et late dicta). [11] We do not thereby assume two churches, 
 antagonistic and standing alongside of each other; rather, the 
 relation between them is this, that the Church in the narrower 
 sense exists in the midst of the Church in the wider sense ; but 
 not so that the latter is numerically equal to the former, but that 
 it contains, or at least may contain, members within itself whom 
 we dare not count as belonging to the Church in the narrower 
 sense. [12] Thus, every one will readily understand what indi- 
 viduals are to be counted as belonging to the Church in this 
 wider sense, not, however, who of them belong to the Church in 
 the narrower sense ; and hence the distinction between the visi- 
 ble and invisible Church corresponds to that between the Church 
 widely and narrowly considered. [13] It becomes of the greatest 
 importance, then, if these distinctions be made, not to transfer 
 without qualification the promises and predicates that are given 
 
MEANING OF THE WORD CHURCH. 
 
 587 
 
 to the Church in the narrower sense to the Church in the wider 
 sense, [14] which course might easily give occasion to false fear 
 or to false hopes, and to self-deception. [15] Concerning the 
 latter it cannot be said, in the same sense, but only by synec- 
 doche, [16] that it is one, holy, catholic, and apostolic, or that it 
 cannot fail or err ; [17] rather, from the fact that the call reaches 
 many who do not receive it in their hearts, it already is manifest, 
 that individuals in it often fail and err, and it is quite as pos- 
 sible that the evil may preponderate in the Church as that the 
 good should do so. 
 
 The Church (in the wider sense) is further called a true or a 
 false one, not in consequence of there being a greater or smaller 
 number of believers or unbelievers in it, but just in proportion 
 as the doctrines of the Gospel are preached in it purely or im- 
 purely, and as the means by which we attain salvation are more 
 or less purely and fully administered in it. [18] The pure 
 preaching of the divine Word, and the proper administration of 
 the Sacraments are, therefore, the marks by which we may 
 recognize the Church as a true one. [19] 
 
 [1] Grh. (XI, 7): "The word Church [ecclesia~] (from siaoaXeiv) 
 
 generically signifies an assembly or congregation, whence it is applied 
 to political and secular assemblies. In order, therefore, that the holy 
 assembly of the Church be distinguished from secular assemblies, it is 
 called the Church of God, fj EKKlrjoia rov 6eov, Neh. 13:1; Acts 20 : 28 ; 
 1 Cor. 1 : 2 ; 10 : 32 ; 11 : 16, 22 ; 15 : 9 ; 2 Cor. 1:1; Gal. 1:13; 
 1 Thess. 2: 11 ; 2 Thess. 1 : 4; 1 Tim. 3 : 5, 15. Likewise kKKlrjaia kv 
 deti, 1 Thess. 1 : 1, -ov nvpiov, Deut. 23 : 1 ; Micah 2 : 5. But, inasmuch 
 as even heretics boast of a church, for the sake of difference and honor 
 the true Church is called % eiachfaia rav ayuw, Ps. 89: 15; 149: 1; 1 
 Cor. 14: 33, to which is opposed -fj enK/^oia irovqpsvo/ievov, Ps. 26 : 5 ; 
 Rev. 2 : 9. Finally, inasmuch as the Church of both the Old and New 
 Testaments is said to be the Church of God and of the Lord, in order 
 to express the difference, the New Testament Church is said to be the 
 Church of Christ. Matt. 16 : 18 ; Rom. 16 : 16 ; Col. 1 : 24." 
 
 [2] Holl. (1292) : " The head of the Church is Christ, the God-man 
 (Col. 1:18; Eph. 1 : 22, 23 ; 4 : 16), not only because of his superior 
 eminence and perfection above the members, but also especially because 
 of the moral and physical or real influence, which, according to both 
 natures, he affords the members of his mystical body. The influence 
 
588 OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 which Christ exerts over the members of the Church is twofold : (1) 
 moral, which consists in this, that Christ, by virtue of his merit, has 
 acquired all spiritual blessings, Eph. 1:3; (2) physical, or real, so 
 called in distinction from that which is moral ; this Christ affords the 
 members of his Church efficiently, through actions terminating in them- 
 selves, by enkindling, increasing and strengthening faith, love, and 
 other Christian virtues ; by comforting anxious minds, by sustaining the 
 wavering, by bringing back the wandering, by governing each and 
 every one in the course of life." 
 
 The Church is, accordingly, the kingdom in which Christ exercises 
 his dominion ; hence many Dogmaticians append the doctrine concern- 
 ing the Church to that concerning Christ as the sovereign in his empire. 
 
 In connection with the foregoing proposition, the following antitheses 
 to the Roman Catholic doctrine are presented : 
 
 Holl. (1293) : (a) "Neither from necessity, nor from Christ's free 
 will and appointment, are we to recognize, in addition to Christ, any 
 other head of the Church, that in Christ's stead visibly governs the 
 Church universal." 
 
 (b) (1295) : " Christ never appointed the Apostle Peter the general 
 head of his Church, neither did he grant to him primacy of power and 
 jurisdiction over the Catholic Church." 
 
 (c) (1297) : " The Pope of Rome is neither the successor of Peter in 
 the episcopate nor the head or monarch of the Catholic Church." 
 
 The Protestant Dogmaticians, in expounding the passage, Matt. 16 : 
 
 18, understand the "rock" to mean the confession which Peter had 
 made, v. 17. Holl. (1295): "The meaning is, 'Thou art Peter, a 
 man made of rock, standing upon thy confession just as upon a rock, or 
 most firm petra, and, upon this rock will I build my Church, so that it 
 may be made of rock, immovable and impregnable, as long as it will 
 stand upon this confession of doctrine, as upon an immovable rock,' v. 
 
 19. Christ gave the keys to Peter, not as a prince, but as a minister 
 and steward. Now, indeed, not only Peter, but also the rest of the 
 apostles were appointed stewards by Christ, 1 Cor. 4: 1. Therefore 
 the keys here promised Peter were likewise given to the rest of the 
 apostles." 
 
 [3] Holl. (1300): "The inner and essential form of the Church 
 consists in the spiritual union of true believers and saints, who, as mem- 
 bers of the Church, are bound together with Christ the Head, through 
 true and living faith (John 1:12; Gal. 3 : 27 ; 1 Cor. 6 : 17), which 
 is followed by a communion of mutual love (John 13 : 35)." 
 
 [4] Br. (742) : " Those men whom God, in accordance with his 
 
589 
 
 eternal decree, has granted his faith and grace, taken collectively, are 
 called the Church." 
 
 "Men who are true believers and saints constitute the material of the 
 Church," hence the Church is defined as " the congregation of saints 
 who truly believe in the Gospel of Christ, and have the Holy Ghost." 
 (Ap. Coxf., IV, 28.) It is better defined, " the congregation of 
 saints," than " the congregation of the elect," as some define it, " be- 
 cause the title, t saints and believers,' is broader than ' elect.' Wherefore, 
 since the Catholic Church embraces, within its circuit, not only the 
 elect, properly and accurately so called, but also saints and believers 
 who afterwards likewise fall away, it is preferable to define the Church 
 as the congregation of saints and true believers, than of the elect, al- 
 though if the term 'of the elect,' be employed in a correct sense, viz., 
 according to the ecclesiastical and general usage, it ought to offend no 
 one." (Grh., XI, 13.) 
 
 The scriptural proof that the Church is the congregation of saints, 
 according to Quen. (IV, 489) : "In Scripture passages the Church is 
 called, (1) the mystical body of Christ, Rom. 12: 5; 1 Cor. 10: 17; 12: 
 27; Eph. 1: 23; Col. 1 : 18; (2) the Church is the mother of true be- 
 lievers, Gal. 4: 26, of the sons of God, John 1: 12; 3: 6, who are led 
 by the Spirit of God, Rom. 8 : 14, and are the heirs of Christ, Rom. 8: 
 17; (3) the Church is Christ's fold, John 10: 1, 27, 28; (4) prophets 
 and apostles frequently, ascribe such praises to the Church as cannot be 
 referred to the entire assembly of the called, which embraces good and 
 evil, wheat and tares, Matt 13 : 24, good and bad fish, sheep and goats, 
 Matt. 3: 12; 13: 47, 49; John 10: 1." (IV, 490): "Therefore, that 
 must be termed a Church, properly and accurately so called, to which 
 these praises and attributes primarily and immediately belong. For, in 
 the Old and New Testaments it is frequently called the Bride of Christ, 
 John 3 : 29; 2 Cor. 11:2; Rev. 21 : 9 ; Cant. 4 : 7, a chaste virgin, 2 
 Cor. 11 : 2, one flesh with Christ, Eph. 5: 30 (none of these accord 
 with the wicked), the house of the living God, 1 Tim. 3: 15, a spiritual 
 house, 1 Pet. 2:5; Tit. 2 : 14, seq. To this none belong except those 
 who are living stones built upon the chief corner-stone, Jesus Christ, 
 Eph. 2 : 20, 21 ; 1 Pet. 2 : 5." 
 
 [5] Br. (742) : " Believers, considered with respect to the present 
 life, are called the Church militant; but with respect to the other life, 
 or the life to come, the Church triumphant." 
 
 Grh. (XI, 10) : " That is called the Church militant, which in this 
 life is still fighting, under the banner of Christ, against Satan, the 
 w T orld, and the flesh. (Here observe that this description pertains only 
 
590 OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 to the Church of the elect, and if indeed it ought to be applied to the 
 assembly of the called, it must be added that the Church militant has 
 been called and established for the purpose of fighting bravely against 
 these contending powers, an object common to all those called into the 
 Church.)" 
 
 " That is called the Church triumphant^ which, being transferred to 
 heavenly rest, and relieved from the labor of fighting, and the danger 
 of being overcome, triumphs in heaven against all contending powers." 
 
 " The Church is called militant from its spiritual war, or battle 
 against the devil, Eph. 6: 10, 11; 1 Pet. 5: 8, 9, the world, 1 John 5 : 
 4, and the flesh, Rom. 7 : 14; Gal. 5 : 17." 
 
 "The Church derives the name triumphant from the spiritual tri- 
 umph or victory obtained over its enemies, Rev. 2: 10; 4: 4; 7: 9." 
 
 [6] Symb. Nic: (I believe) " one holy Christian and apostolic 
 Church." 
 
 1. Grh. (XI, 35) : " The Church is said to be one, because it is 
 gathered by one Lord, through one Baptism, into one mystical body, 
 under one head, governed by one Spirit, bound together in the unity of 
 a common faith, hope, and love (Eph. 4: 5), acknowledges one faith, 
 and is called by one calling to one celestial inheritance." Holl. 
 (1301) : " The Church is (a) one and undivided, because all the members, 
 of the Church are united in Christ as a head, through faith in Christ, 
 which is joined not only with love to God, but also with inseparable 
 connection with our neighbor; (b) it is one and no more; (a) because 
 it does not acknowledge a plurality of assemblies, of the same nature, 
 existing at the same time ; inasmuch as the Church catholic is the as- 
 sembly of all believers, united by faith to Christ, as the head ; (/3) be- 
 cause it does not acknowledge a Church succeeding it; inasmuch as it 
 never has altogether perished, and never will altogether perish ; but, 
 from its first beginning, has continued, by a constant succession of be- 
 lievers, to the present time, and will always continue until the end of 
 time." 
 
 2. Grh. (XI, 36) : "The Church is said to be holy, from 1 Cor. 14: 
 33; Rev. 11 : 2; because Christ its head is holy, Heb. 7: 26, who makes 
 the Church partaker of his holiness, John 17: 19 ; because it is called 
 by a holy calling and separated from the world, 2 Tim. 1:9; because 
 the Word of God, committed to it, is holy, Rom. 3:2; because the 
 Holy Ghost in this assembly sanctifies believers by applying to them, 
 through faith, Christ's holiness, working inner renewal and holiness in 
 their hearts, and awakening in them the desire of perfect holiness." 
 
 3. Ap. Conf. (IY, 10): "And it calls the Church catholic, so that 
 
THE CHURCH APOSTOLIC. 591 
 
 we may understand that the Church is not an external polity of certain 
 nations, but rather the men scattered throughout the entire globe, who 
 agree concerning the Gospel, and have the same Christ, the same Holy 
 Ghost, and the same Sacraments." 
 
 Holl. (1302): " The Church is called catholic (the same as mff bXov, 
 according to that which is entire or universal), either with respect to its 
 properties, because of its doctrine and faith, in so far as it professes the 
 faith that the whole body of believers has at all times professed ; or with 
 respect to its extent, because of its being spread over the entire globe, not 
 like the Old Testament Church, taken from a particular tribe or nation, 
 but from all nations on the whole globe. That doctrine and faith is 
 termed catholic, which is required of absolutely all who are to be saved." 
 The predicate of catholicity can, therefore, be applied to the Church as 
 the antithesis of heresy. " In this manner it is the same as the true and 
 orthodox Church, and is so-called from the Catholic doctrine, i. e., the 
 orthodox doctrine of Christ and the apostles, which, inasmuch as here- 
 sies grew up here and there, has been called catholic, because it has pro- 
 ceeded from Christ and the apostles, has been intrusted to all believers, 
 and been received and believed by them with unanimous agreement." 
 In this sense, therefore, this predicate can be applied also to a particu- 
 lar Church. It can, however, be also applied to distinguish the Church 
 in general from particular churches. " In this manner it is the same as 
 Church universal, and in this manner the fact that it embraces the doc- 
 trine of Christ and the apostles, does not suffice, for a particular church 
 receives this ; but, for the Church catholic there is required, besides, 
 that it includes all believers of all times and places." Hutt. (Loc. c. 
 Th., 555): "Therefore, whatever church be regarded, whether that of 
 Rome, or Corinth, or Jerusalem, or any other, according to this latter 
 signification, it is only particular ; although with respect to preceding 
 significations, it can be called catholic, provided that it preserve and re- 
 tain, in good condition, the unity of the faith and spirit." 
 
 4. Holl. (1303): "The Church is called apostolic, partly because 
 it was planted by the apostles ; and partly because it has embraced and 
 been built upon the doctrine handed down by the apostles, on the foun- 
 dation of the apostles and prophets, Eph. 2 : 20." 
 
 [7] Grh. (XI, 39): " It is necessary for every one of those who are 
 to be saved, to be a living member and true citizen of the Catholic and 
 Apostolic Church; and those who are outside of the Church, are, neces- 
 sarily, aliens from God, from Christ, from the benefits of the heavenly 
 kingdom, and the hope of eternal salvation. This is proved by (1) 
 Eph. 2 : 12, 13 ; 4:16; 5:8; 1 Pet. 2:9; Rev. 22 : 15 ; 21:8; (2) 
 
592 OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 by the peculiar benefits conferred by the Church, such as regeneration, 
 renewal, etc. ; for, since these have no place outside of the Church, 
 there also cannot be salvation outside of the Church." The proposi- 
 tion, Extra ecclesiam nulla salus, there is no salvation out of the 
 Church, means, therefore, chiefly, that no one will be saved who does 
 not believe. 
 
 [8] Conf. Aug. (VII. 1) : " They teach that the one holy Church 
 is to continue forever." 
 
 Grh. (XI, 107): "We, in no way, say that the Church catholic 
 (viz., the invisible Church, and Church strictly so called) can fail or 
 perish, because Christ is the eternal king, and the perpetual husband of 
 the Church, and, therefore, by virtue of his relation, he has an eternal 
 kingdom, and is always collecting for himself, out of the human race, a 
 Church, which he cherishes, loves, and protects as his bride, Matt. 16 : 
 18 ; Luke 1 : 33 ; 1 Tim. 3 : 15." 
 
 [9] Grh. (XI, 143): " The entire Church never errs in such a man- 
 ner, that there are not some who, following the simple guidance of the 
 Word, by the direction and effectual working of the Holy Ghost, are so 
 sanctified as to retain the foundation of salvation, to persevere exempt 
 from fundamental errors, and be kept by the power of God unto salva- 
 tion, although these are sometimes few and so concealed by the public 
 prevalence of persecutions and corruptions that they are not recognized 
 publicly by the world, Matt. 16 : 16 ; 24 : 24 ; 28: 20." 
 
 Id. (XI, 143): " Concerning the Church of the elect still warring on 
 earth, we must distinctly reply, that, since errors are two-fold, some are 
 fundamental, overthrowing the very foundation of faith, and some, indeed, 
 are non-fundamental, existing at the same time with the foundation of 
 faith ; and error likewise can occur in a two-fold manner, either for a 
 time or to the end. Those who are elect can, for a time, be involved, 
 and some even actually are involved in errors, not only of a less griev- 
 ous character, but even in fundamental errors ; yet, in the meantime, 
 before the end of life, they again free themselves from them ; for other- 
 wise they would not be elect properly so called ; therefore, they do not 
 persevere to the end in fundamental errors, but may be involved in the 
 less grievous errors, not only for a time, but even to the end ; neverthe- 
 less, by the fire of the cross and of trial, these are diminished in them so 
 as not to defeat their salvation." 
 
 [10] Br. (759): •< The Church of Christ, scattered throughout the 
 entire world, comprehends many particular assemblies, which also have 
 appropriated to themselves the name and title of churches ; for, although 
 believers themselves are thus diffused over the earth, they still, being 
 
THE CHURCH UNIVERSAL AND PARTICULAR. 593 
 
 united here and there by certain bonds, grow into certain congregations 
 and establish them ; in so far as they are served by one regular and 
 complete ministry, which is nevertheless distinct from the ministries of 
 other congregations." 
 
 Quex. (IV, 479): " The Church is said to be universal, for a double 
 reason : (1) With respect to place. (2) With respect to time. With 
 respect to place, the Church is said to be the general assembly which is 
 collected from different nations throughout the whole world, for Church 
 fellowship, and participation, through the Word and Sacraments, in the 
 benefits of Christ. With respect to tit?ie, it is the assembly which, in 
 different times, from the origin to the end of the world, is collected to- 
 gether through the Word. Therefore, the Church universal, considered 
 absolutely, or with respect to both time and place, is the general assem- 
 bly of true believers, whom God, from the beginning of the world to its 
 end, has called, and to-day calls, and to the end of the world will call, 
 through the preaching of the Word, out of all peoples and nations, to 
 the actual participation in spiritual and heavenly blessings. The Church 
 universal, considered relatively, is the assembly of all true believers, who 
 at the same time, e. g., of the Old or of the New Testament, or even at 
 the present time, everywhere continue in one and the same inner com- 
 munion of faith, grace, love, and salvation. A particular Church is an 
 assembly, not of all, but of some believers, called in a certain place, to 
 partake of salvation, and persevering in inner spiritual communion. A 
 Church is said to be particular in a twofold sense, (a) with respect to 
 time ; (b) with respect to place. With respect to time, the Church of 
 the Old Testament is one, and the Church of the New Testament an- 
 other. With respect to place, one is collected by God throughout an 
 entire kingdom ; another, in a city, or even in a house. Hence, the 
 apostles make mention not only of a Church in a house «""' oltcov^ Rom. 
 16: 5; and the Church at Corinth (rijvevKopivdy), 1 Cor. 1:2; but, 
 also, in the plural, of the churches of the Gentiles (rav kdvuv^ Rom. 16 : 
 4 ; Gal. 1 : 2, 22 ; Rev. 1 : 4." 
 
 [11] The Church in this wider sense is, therefore, named "the as- 
 sembly of the called," and, as "the Church broadly and improperly so 
 called" (" the entire assembly of the called, in which all those who come 
 together with the outward profession to hear the Word and use the 
 Sacraments, are regarded as members of the Church"), it is distin- 
 guished from " the Church strictly (properly, accurately, principally) 
 so called (the entire assembly of true believers aud saints), who are fur- 
 nished not only with the outward profession of faith and the outward 
 use of the Sacraments, but also with true faith of heart and inner re- 
 
594 OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 generation." The ecclesia late dicta is therefore termed Church " by 
 synecdoche, viz., of a part for the whole, by which there is ascribed to 
 the entire assembly, composed of good and evil, that which belongs to 
 only a part." To the Church in the former sense, the following passa- 
 ges refer: Acts 20 : 28 ; 1 Cor. 12 : 28 ; 14: 4, 23. In the latter sense . 
 Matt. 16 : 18 ; Eph. 1 : 22, 23 ; 5 : 23-26 ; 1 Tim. 3: 15. Grh. (XI, 
 50): ." Those who by the call are brought together into the assembly of 
 the Church, differ in two respects. For, by the Holy Ghost some are 
 inwardly regenerated, renewed, endowed with true faith, enlightened, 
 sanctified, and, in this manner, become true and living members of the* 
 Church. But others join the assembly of the called, i. e., the visible 
 Church, only by an outward association, which consists in the profes- 
 sion of faith and the use of the Sacraments, while, at the same time, 
 they are without inner regeneration and holiness. The former are true 
 and living members of the Church, deriving life and breath from Christ, 
 their Head; the latter are corrupt and dead members. The former be- 
 long to the Church inwardly; the latter improperly. The former, by 
 reason of inner and spiritual connection with Christ; the latter, by rea- 
 son of outward custom, profession, and association with the assembly of 
 the called. The former, in the heart ; the latter, in outward appearance. 
 The former, actually; the latter, according to opinion. The former, ac- 
 cording to the judgment of God; the latter, according to the judgment 
 of men. The former, to the Church equally in body and soul ; the latter, 
 in body, and not in soul. The former, as true and sound parts of the 
 body; the latter, as the mange and evil humors in the body." 
 
 [12] Grh., Conf. Cath.: "We do not affirm that there are two 
 Churches, the one true and internal, and the other nominal and exter- 
 nal ; but we say that the Church is one and the same, viz., the entire 
 assembly of the called considered in a twofold manner, namely, iauSev 
 [from within] and Uudsv [from without], or, with respect to the call and 
 outward association, consisting in the profession of faith and the use of 
 the Sacraments ; and with respect to inner regeneration and internal 
 association, consisting in the bond of the Spirit. In the former man- 
 ner and respect we grant that even hypocrites and those who are not 
 saints belong to the Church, but in the latter manner and respect we 
 contend that only true believers and saints belong to it." On the other 
 hand, Hutt. (Loc. c. Th., 508): "Although it is by no means sufficient 
 for salvation that you be in the Church, described thus generally, and 
 only with respect to the outward profession of Christian faith, yet sal- 
 vation itself cannot be found by any one outside of this assembly. And 
 here the comparison of the Church with the ark of Noah is in point. 
 
595 
 
 For, as no one was saved outside of this while the deluge lasted, and yet 
 not all who were in the ark were saved eternally, so outside of this 
 Church of the called no one is saved, and yet not every one embraced 
 in this vast assembly of the Church is saved." 
 
 [1<°] Hutt. (Loc. Th., 193) : "If you consider the outward fellow- 
 ship of signs and rites of the Church, the Church militant is said to be 
 visible, and embraces all those who are within the assembly of the 
 called, whether they be godly or ungodly, whether they be elect or 
 reprobate. But if you consider the Church in so far as it is a fellow- 
 ship of faith and of the Spirit dwelling in the hearts of believers, it is said 
 to be invisible, and is peculiar to the elect." Cf. Ap. Conf., IV, 3. 
 
 Br. (769) : " The Church, properly so called, is, indeed, not dis- 
 tinctly visible (or recognizable, so that we may be able to know distinctly 
 and individually who those are that truly compose it as its members ; 
 for faith neither meets the senses, neither can we understand with much 
 certainty what there is in others, 2 Tim. 2: 19), but only obscurely 
 (namely, where congregations exist, especially the larger ones, in which 
 the Word of God is correctly taught and the Sacraments rightly ad- 
 ministered, it is well understood that there are there some true believers 
 and saints who constitute a part of the Church of Christ). But that, 
 which by synecdoche is called a particular church, is so visible that it can 
 be recognized as true and with respect to its members, and can be dis- 
 tinguished from false or corrupt churches (for they profess the Catholic 
 faith in its integrity and without corruption, and use the Sacraments 
 aright, and can be perceived without doubt and individually)." The 
 Church, is therefore (Grh. XI, 82), "(1) visible with respect to the 
 called, invisible with respect to the elect; for who are truly born again 
 and elect does not appear outwardly, neither can it be perceived by the 
 aid of the eyes; (2) visible with respect to outward fellowship, invisible 
 with respect to inner fellowship ; for who belong to the outward fellow- 
 ship is manifest to men's eyes, but who belong to the inner fellowship of 
 the Church is not likewise manifest, inasmuch as faith and spiritual 
 newness lie concealed under the covering of the infirmities of the flesh ; 
 (3) visible with respect to outward means and instruments, through 
 which the Church is collected by God on this earth ; as also with respect 
 to the outward exercises of religion, which are the profession of doctrine 
 and Church discipline, the preaching of the Word, and the administra- 
 tion of the Sacraments, as also the remaining outward offices of the 
 Church. On the other hand, it is said to be invisible, primarily indeed 
 and chiefly with respect to faith and the inner gifts of the Holy Ghost 
 in the regenerate, which cannot be perceived by human eyes ; secondly, 
 
596 OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 with respect also to the Head of the mystical body, whom now we do 
 not see, and because the discerning of the good from the hypocrites, 
 with whom they are intermingled in the visible Church, has been left 
 only to the divine knowledge." 
 
 The same remarks, moreover, apply to this distinction as to that be- 
 tween the Church as taken in a broader or narrower sense. Grh. 
 (XI, 81): "We by no means introduce two Churches as opposed to 
 each other, as though the visible and invisible Churches were contra- 
 distinguished species; but we say that the visible and invisible are one 
 and the same Church, with a diverse relation." The visible and invis- 
 ible Churches, therefore, are not opposed to each other as contraries, 
 but as subalterns and subordinates. "For the invisible assembly of the 
 elect is comprised under the visible congregation of the called, because 
 the elect are not to be sought outside of the assembly of the called, and 
 the Church of the called is more comprehensive than that of the elect 
 (Matt. 20: 16). Whoever, therefore, belong to the invisible Church, 
 i. e., all who are elect, are also the called, but not the reverse." (Grh., 
 XI, 83.) 
 
 Besides, false conceptions of the invisible Church are guarded against 
 by the following statements (ib.) : " That the Church of the elect is said 
 to be invisible, not because the godly scattered through the world do not 
 come under the sight of men with respect to their person, but because 
 faith and the divine election, with respect to which they belong to the 
 Church as true members, do not appear in them; they are seen as men 
 having bodies, and not as elect men ; nor is the Church of the elect said 
 to be invisible because the godly and elect have no intercourse whatever 
 with the visible ministry of the Word and Sacraments, and with the 
 outward practice of divine worship, but because the inner gifts of the 
 Holy Ghost, by which, in the sight of God, they are distinguished from 
 corrupt and dead members, are in no way manifest to the sight of men." 
 As a secondary reason for distinguishing between the Church visible 
 and invisible, Grh. (XI, 85) states the following: " Because not only 
 do earthly governments surpass the Church in outward splendor, but 
 heretical assemblies also very often excel it in wealth, power, etc.; and 
 therefore that the Church may not be judged from its outward appear- 
 ance, it is said to be invisible, i. <?., that the pitiable, despised, and small 
 assembly, in which are many weaknesses, and which is not only op- 
 pressed by persecutions and the cross, but is also disgraced by many 
 causes of offence and stumbling-blocks, is the Church, concerning which 
 we must decide not from its outward form, but from the Word, and of 
 which we must judge in accordance with the norm of the Word. And 
 
597 
 
 in this sense and respect we grant that the Church, in this signification, 
 is not constantly invisible in the same manner, i. e., it does not always 
 lie hidden, oppressed, despised, and degraded, but, like the moon, 
 varies, and increases and diminishes its external splendor; for some- 
 times it is oppressed by persecutions and obscured by clouds of heresies, 
 and sometimes enjoys true tranquility, and shines most clearly with 
 pureness of doctrine." 
 
 While the distinction between the Church visible and invisible was 
 not expressed, in direct words, in the Symbolical Books, and by the 
 earliest Dogmaticians, as Melanchthon, we nevertheless find the sub- 
 stance of it set forth in the following statements: Ap. Conf. (IV, 5) : 
 "The Church is not only the fellowship of outward matters and rites, 
 as other governments, but is principally a fellowship of faith and the 
 Holy Ghost in hearts . . . And this Church alone is called the body 
 of Christ, because Christ renews, sanctifies, and governs it by his 
 Spirit. . . . Although, therefore, hypocrites and wicked men are mem- 
 bers of this true Church, according to the outward rites, nevertheless, 
 when the Church is defined, it is necessary to define that Church which 
 is the living body of Christ, and likewise is the Church both in name 
 and reality." But the earliest Dogmaticians do not set out, as we do, 
 with the conception of the Church as an assembly of saints, and they, 
 moreover, employ the expression visible Church in a different sense. 
 Thus Mel. (Loc. c. Th., 285) : "The visible Church is the assembly 
 of those embracing the Gospel of Christ, and using aright the Sacra- 
 ments, in which, through the ministry of the Gospel, God is effica- 
 cious." Their purpose is to rebuke those who refuse to attach them- 
 selves to any visible Church, saying that the Church does not assume a 
 visible form. By the assertion that the Church is visible, Melanchthon 
 means, therefore, only to say, that there are indeed certain marks by 
 which a church can be recognized as the true one. Ap. Conf. (IV, 
 20): "Nor, indeed, are we imagining a Platonic state, as some im- 
 piously satirize us, but we say that this Church exists, viz., those truly 
 believing and righteous scattered through the entire globe. And we 
 add its marks, the pure doctrine of the Gospel and the Sacraments." 
 
 [14] Bpv. (761): "The more eminent praises and the promises of 
 perpetual duration, which in the Scriptures are ascribed to the Church, 
 ought not to be referred to any definite, particular church, but to the 
 Church of Christ considered absolutely." 
 
 [15] Grh., Conf. Cath.: "The distinction of the Church into vis- 
 ible and invisible is opposed to the opinion of the Papists, that the 
 Church of Christ is so confined to the Pope of Rome and the prelates 
 
598 OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 who are in the regular succession, that whatever they affirm and believe 
 must necessarily be received by all, and that there dare be no dissent 
 from these in any manner or upon any pretext. Likewise, to the belief 
 of those who flatter themselves in their offences, and think that they 
 cannot be damned, as they are members of the visible Church." 
 
 [16] Grh. (XI, 13) : " But, inasmuch as to the saints and true be- 
 lievers in the Church, those are joined who are not saints, being indeed 
 without inner regeneration and renewal, yet by outward fellowship 
 (which consists in the profession of faith and the use of the Sacraments) 
 joined, in this life, to the assembly of saints, it follows that the Church 
 is sometimes received in a popular manner, for the entire assembly of 
 the called, to which those honorable commendations, which are ascribed in 
 the Scriptures to the Church, belong only by synecdoche, an ordinary 
 figure in the Scriptures, doubtless because of the elect, who are in this 
 assembly ; just as if any one would eulogize a state because of its hon- 
 orable and excellent citizens, with whom, nevertheless, wicked and per- 
 verse persons are intermingled ; or, as if any one would adorn a field 
 with praiseworthy epithets, because of the wheat, with which, never- 
 theless, tares are intermingled." 
 
 [17] Hojll. (1317) : "Every particular and visible church may be 
 so corrupted by fundamental errors, that the teachers professing false 
 doctrine may prevail, and constitute the public ministry, the small 
 number of true believers lying concealed under the multitude of error- 
 ists." 
 
 Grh. (XI, 109) : " We say that not this and that particular church 
 alone, but absolutely all the particular churches, and, therefore, the 
 entire visible Church, can be obscured by a cloud of corruptions, errors, 
 scandals, heresies, persecutions, etc., and be reduced to such a condition 
 that its outward splendor and glory may fail, and there may no longer 
 remain any manifest and visible assembly to rejoice in the pure ministry 
 of the Word as it sounds forth publicly." Therefore, in opposition to 
 the Catholics (ib.) : " We therefore deny that the Church has been 
 bound to any fixed seat in such a manner as to continue in it, with vis- 
 ible glory, by any perpetual succession ; as our adversaries say of the 
 Komish Church, that that is the only Catholic Church, in which the 
 Pope is the vicar of Christ." Yet, on the other hand (ib., 110) : " Nor 
 is the Church ever hidden in such a manner as not to be seen by some, 
 if not by the world and the unbelieving, yet by pious confessors in exile 
 and concealment ; nay even, as in the deepest state of self-renunciation, 
 Christ, the Head of the Church, sent forth some rays of his divine ma- 
 jesty, from which his true divinity could be recognized ; so, in the deepest 
 
A TRUE AND A FALSE CHURCH. 599 
 
 depression of the Church, the confession of some of the martyrs shines 
 forth, and presents the clearest testimony to the perpetuity and truth of 
 the Church." 
 
 [18] Holl. (1306) : " The true or pure Church is an assembly of 
 men, in which all things necessary to be believed for salvation, and to 
 be done for attaining holiness of life, are clearly taught from God's 
 Word, without the mixture of any hurtful errors, and the Sacraments 
 are rightly administered according to the institution of Christ, and thus 
 spiritual sons of God are begotten, who, through true faith, are united 
 to Christ the Head, and in him are made one body." 
 
 (1307) : " A false or impure Church is an assembly of men, in which 
 the doctrine of faith is publicly proclaimed from the Word of God, with, 
 a mixture of errors and corruptions, and the Sacraments are adminis- 
 tered, it is true, yet they are not distributed in that manner, and for 
 that end, in and for which they were appointed by Christ." 
 
 " Obs. The true and false Churches are here opposed to each other, 
 not by way of contradiction, in accordance with which, a church which 
 is clearly not a church, is a false church, e. g., an assembly of Moham- 
 medans, treading under foot all of the true religion, but privatively, as 
 a false church is a falsified, vitiated, corrupted, impure church." It is 
 not asserted, however, in reference to the latter, that there may not be 
 some within it who are saved, since even in such a church the Word of 
 God is still preached. Holl. (1313) : "In a church, in which the 
 Word of God is publicly read and explained and preached, and, in like 
 manner, Baptism is administered uncorrupt in its essentials, spiritual 
 sons of God, and heirs of eternal life, can be and are born. But, 
 in a corrupted church (the Roman and Greek), the Word of God is 
 publicly read and explained, etc. Therefore," etc. (1314), ''in a false 
 church specifically so called, in so far as in the same the Word of 
 God is publicly read and explained, and Baptism is administered uncor- 
 rupted in essentials, regeneration and salvation are granted, yet not 
 without great danger of souls, because these can be so obscured by false 
 dogmas, that either the light of faith is not enkindled, or being en- 
 kindled in Baptism, is overwhelmed and extinguished by errors." 
 
 The phrase " Extra ecclesiam nulla salus," which our Church also 
 adopts (comp. Note 7), does not, therefore, directly exclude the mem- 
 bers of another particular church from the hope of salvation, since one 
 may be regenerated even in such a church. The phrase is therefore 
 not understood in our Church as it is in the Roman Catholic. That 
 church declares salvation to be impossible for any one who belongs to 
 another particular church, while we maintain by this statement only 
 
600 OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 this, that he who would be sure of his salvation must belong to the as 
 sembly of the saints. 
 
 [19] Holl. (1307): " The proper (essential and principal) marks of 
 the true visible Church, from which its truth is recognized in such a 
 manner that it can be distinguished from every false church, are the 
 -pure preaching of the divine Word (John 15 : 3) and the legitimate ad- 
 ministration of the Sacraments (Rom. 4: 11)/' Grh. (XI, 195): 
 " The Church is established, brought together, nourished, and pre- 
 served by the Word of God, and the use of the Sacraments. There- 
 fore, the Word of God, and the use of the Sacraments are the proper, 
 genuine, and infallible marks of the Church, and consequently where 
 these are pure, the Church is pure." Grh., Conf. Cath. : " When 
 the pure preaching of the Word is affirmed as a mark of the true 
 Church, the term preaching is received in a general sense for a pro- 
 fession of doctrine common to all the members, pastors, and hearers of 
 the Church, and for the public explanation of Biblical texts, which is 
 also a preaching, Acts 15 : 21" (" whether this be pure or impure ought 
 to be determined from the public symbols and confessions published in 
 the name of the entire Church, or approved by the entire Church, and 
 not from the opinions or writings of this or that teacher" (Holl., 1308)). 
 " Preaching, in its narrow sense, is an action peculiar to the pastor, 
 rather than common to the entire Church, and is not purely and abso- 
 lutely necessary to the Church, as is shown by the times of the most 
 grievous persecutions, in which the Church was able to be preserved by 
 the reading of Scripture alone, without the public preaching of pure 
 doctrine." 
 
 Further : " Whole and entire churches are not to be estimated from 
 the pastors alone, nor from some few ; wherefore whole churches are not 
 immediately to be condemned if either the pastors or some few depart 
 from soundness and purity of doctrine, because the ears of hearers are 
 often purer than the lips of teachers ; and many in a corrupt state of 
 the Church, retaining, after having received Baptism, the fundamental 
 articles of the heavenly doctrine, either do not assent to the errors in 
 reference to them, which the false teachers scatter, or cling to them 
 without any pertinacity, or again release themselves from them before 
 the end of life." 
 
 Finally : " Yet we must observe that there certain grades of this 
 purity, because the Word of God is preached in the Church sometimes 
 with greater and sometimes with less purity; nor does a church imme- 
 diately cease to exist if the teaching on some articles of religion be even 
 for the most part not pure. The more purely and truthfully, therefore, 
 
THE CHURCH, COLLECTIVE AND REPRESENTATIVE. 601 
 
 the Word of God is preached in a church, and the more nearly the 
 preaching and doctrine approach the form of Holy Scripture, the purer 
 and truer will be a church ; but the farther it departs from the rule of 
 the Word, the more impure and corrupt will be the state of a church. 
 Yet it is not through every corruption that a church ceases to exist, be- 
 cause we have shown above that God begets and preserves for himself a 
 holy seed and spiritual children, even at the time when the public min- 
 istry of the visible Church is corrupt." 
 
 In opposition to the Donatists and Montanists, it is very earnestly 
 maintained that the marks above mentioned are the only essential ones ; 
 but that, also, where these exist, it is the duty of every one to connect 
 himself with this Church. Mel. (Loc. c. Th., 284): " Neither let us 
 praise the stragglers who wander about and attach themselves to no 
 church, because they never find a church of such a type as that in it 
 something is not wanting in morals or discipline, but let us search for a 
 church in which the articles of faith are correctly taught, and to this let 
 us attach ourselves." 
 
 The marks which the Roman Catholic Church assigns as those of a 
 true Church are rejected as deceptive. They are the following: "The 
 name Catholic, antiquity, uninterrupted duration, amplitude or multi- 
 tude of believers, succession of believing bishops in the Roman Church, 
 agreement in doctrine with the primitive Church, union of the members 
 among themselves and with the Head, sanctity of doctrine, efficacy of 
 doctrine, holiness of life of its founders, glory of miracles, light of proph- 
 ecy, confession of adversaries, unhappy end of enemies, temporal felicity 
 conferred upon those who have defended the Church." Of the mark of 
 antiquity, Holl. (1312) observes: " By the primitive Church either 
 that is meant which existed indeed many centuries ago, although very 
 corrupt, or the apostolic Church. If the former, the true Church can- 
 not be distinguished from the ancient corrupt Church. If the latter, 
 the mark is indeed correct, but is consistent with our belief. For to 
 agree with the primitive apostolic Church means to embrace the pure 
 doctrine which that Church held." 
 
 § 57. The Church, Collective and Representative. 
 
 The entire number of those who are called to salvation in 
 Christ cannot equally participate in all the affairs of the Church 
 by giving counsel, direction, or decision ; it seeks, therefore, an 
 instrumentality through which it can be represented, and to 
 which it assigns this business, and it finds this in the Ministry, 
 39 
 
602 OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 which is, therefore, not only entrusted with the business of pub- 
 licly proclaiming- the faith of the Church, [1] but also of leading 
 the Church, and of discussing and deciding all the questions that 
 may arise in it. The Ministry we therefore call the representative 
 Church, as distinguished from the collective Church, by which we 
 mean the whole number of the members of the Church. [2] This 
 Ministry, then, assembles in a council, whenever special occasions 
 call for consultation, and from this council laymen are not ex- 
 cluded if they prove themselves experienced in ecclesiastical 
 affairs, [3] and the conclusions there adopted serve as a rule for 
 the Church. Such an assembly is called a General or universal 
 Council, if all, or, at all events, the most of the particular churches 
 are represented in it ; it is called a Particular Council if only a 
 few particular churches are thus represented. [4] Due regard 
 for order makes it necessary that each council have a president, 
 but only for the purpose of introducing in proper order the mat- 
 ters to be discussed, and to preside over the deliberations, but not 
 as though in the matters of faith themselves that are discussed 
 he should have a higher authority. [5] Under ordinary cir- 
 cumstances a council is called by the political ruler under 
 whose outward protection the Church stands ; in extraordinary 
 cases a portion of the members of the Church has the right to 
 call it. [6] The assembling of a council can have no other pur- 
 pose than to discuss and decide the matters in question upon the 
 basis of the Holy Scriptures, [7] for even the council can have 
 no other means of forming a decision ; the authority of a council 
 is, therefore, not absolutely decisive in all matters of faith, and 
 the council can never demand the submission of the Church to 
 its decrees simply because it has issued them, but only because, 
 and only when, the decision has been made upon the basis of the 
 divine Word, and in accordance with it. [8] The more unani- 
 mously adopted the decrees of a council are, and the greater the 
 number of the particular churches that agree in adopting them, 
 the greater weight do they have ; although even then they are 
 not infallible, and therefore even then not of absolutely binding 
 authority. [9] 
 
 [1] Holl. (1320) : " The profession of faith which is announced by 
 the voice of pastors, when they inculcate doctrine in public congrega- 
 
CLERGY AND LAITY IN CHURCH COUNCILS. ' 603 
 
 tions, and declare it for the reception of hearers, is regarded as the com- 
 mon confession of the entire Church and of the individual members." 
 
 [2] Holl. (1277) : '•'•The collective Church {ecclesia synthetica, cnrb rfjq 
 cwdeaeug, from the collection or connection of all the living members of 
 the Church, who constitute one mystical body) is the Church taken col- 
 lectively, consisting of teachers and hearers, joined by the bond of the 
 same faith, and is called the collective Church in distinction from the 
 representative Church (Matt. 18 : 16), which is an assembly of Christian 
 teachers formally assembled for the purpose of deciding questions con- 
 cerning the doctrine of faith and practice" (Quen. (IV, 478), "inas- 
 much as they can represent and explain the public doctrine of the 
 Church more fully and correctly than the hearers alone without the 
 teachers." 
 
 The question here under consideration is, more generally stated, as the 
 following, viz.: " To whom does the government of the Church belong ?" 
 To this Hutt. answers (Loc. Com. Th., 568) : " We contend that the 
 aristocratic form of government is the best, and belongs most properly 
 to the Church militant on this earth." More accurately : " It is our 
 belief that it is the best and most advantageous of all forms of Church 
 government, if the Church be united in the unity of the faith and Spirit 
 into one mystical body, under one universal Head, Christ, and under 
 one equal ministry of teachers, or pastors, or bishops of the Church. 
 But the belief of the Romanists is this, that the best and most advan- 
 tageous of all forms of Church government is, if the Church, in addition 
 to Christ, recognize also a visible Head on this earth, namely, the Pope 
 of Rome." . . . Hutt. then proceeds (581) : " The question is, If the 
 monarchical form of government cannot exist, what form, therefore, has 
 a place in the Church ?" and answers : " I think that we ought to re- 
 ply to this question not in an absolutely categorical manner, but we 
 should proceed to it distinctly, according to the threefold relation which 
 the Church sustains. For (1) the Church may be considered with re-' 
 spect to its supreme and only Head, which is Christ Jesus alone. In 
 this respect, we acknowledge that the government of the Church is 
 purely and absolutely monarchical. Again (2) the Church may be 
 considered with regard to its mystical body, Avhich grow T s together from 
 the entire organism of called believers into one body, and is quickened 
 by one Spirit. Now, in so far as in the election and calling of minis- 
 ters, the votes and suffrages of the entire people and all the three hier- 
 archical orders are required ; in so far, likewise, as the privileges, bene- 
 fits, rights, and dignities of the Church are not confined to this or that 
 order alone, or this or that man, but have been handed down and com- 
 
604 OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 mitted by Christ and the apostles to the entire Church; so far, cer~ 
 tainly, Flacius Illyricus judged not improperly that the government of 
 the Church possessed something in common with a democracy. . . . 
 Finally (3) the Church is considered, also, with respect to its ministers 
 and pastors, but in such a manner that the universal and particular 
 churches differ. For a particular church can have one certain pastor. 
 . . . But the question is not with respect to such a government of a 
 particular church, but only concerning the government of the universal 
 or Catholic Church; whether this, with respect to its pastors and bish- 
 ops, is monarchical, and depends upon one. Where we maintain the 
 negative, . . . and believe and teach that this government is aristo- 
 cratic, relying upon the following arguments : (1) The Church will at 
 all times be administered in the same manner in which the primitive 
 Church was governed by the apostles. But the apostles governed it in 
 an aristocratic manner. Therefore, (2) That which is administered 
 with equal justice by a few, and by these as the chief persons, is ruled 
 in an aristocratic manner. But the Church is administered with equal 
 justice by a few, and these belonging to a higher class. Therefore, (3) 
 A proof can be derived from the practice of the primitive Church, which 
 was governed by bishops. . . . (4) And the last proof can be produced 
 from the agreement of antiquity. . . . We therefore conclude our 
 thesis with this general syllogism: 'Whatever God appointed, whatever 
 was always observed by the apostles, was confirmed by the practice of 
 the early Church, and finally was profitable and advantageous to the 
 Church, that must be regarded as necessary, and be firmly retained in 
 the Church. But such government of the Church, with respect to bish- 
 ops and teachers, was aristocratic. . . . Therefore it must be regarded 
 as necessary, and be firmly retained, nor must it be changed in any way 
 into a monarchy '." 
 
 [3] Holl. (1320): "In councils, the teachers and delegates of the 
 Church are assembled " (Br. (773) : " Laymen, provided they be ex- 
 perienced and skilful in sacred affairs, godly, and peace-loving"), "to 
 whom the power has been committed, by the entire communion of be- 
 lievers, of examining and deciding concerning the public interpretation 
 of doctrine in doubtful and controverted points." 
 
 As in councils also the clergy largely preponderate, there is no need, 
 in the definition of the representative Church just given, of any special 
 mention of the laity. 
 
 " The subjects with which councils are occupied are questions concern- 
 ing the doctrines of faith, the practical duties, and the ceremonies of the 
 Church of Christ. Example, Acts 15 : 29." God is called "the prin- 
 
THE REPRESENTATIVE CHURCII. 605 
 
 cipal and remote cause of a just and legitimate council." Quex. (IV, 
 483) : " Councils have a divine origin. In the Old Testament, Numb. 
 11 : 16 ; Deut. 17:9; Ps. 122 : 5. In the New Testament as to genus, 
 Matt. 18 : 17 (where, by the Church, is meant the assembly judging, 
 but a promiscuous multitude does not judge. Therefore, a representa- 
 tive Church is intimated, which is the assembly of teachers" (Holl., 
 1321)), " having been inaugurated by the renowned apostolic confer- 
 ence at Jerusalem, Acts 15 : 28." 
 
 [4] Holl. (1324): "There are general councils, to which learned 
 and godly men are called either from all or from very many parts of 
 the Christian world. There are also particular or national councils, to 
 which learned and godly men of a single nation are summoned ; or 
 provincial, in which the teachers of a single province assemble ; or dio- 
 cesan, which consist of religious men of a single diocese." 
 
 [5] Holl. (1322): " The invisible President of the council is the Holy 
 Ghost (Acts 15 : 28, who, by means of the Word comprised in Holy 
 Scripture, speaks, teaches, enlightens, and directs the minds of the 
 Church's arbiters). The visible president is either political or ecclesias- 
 tical. The political president is a Christian emperor, king, or prince, or 
 some one delegated by him. The ecclesiastical presidents one bishop or 
 more, chosen by the emperor, king, or prince, or by the common vote 
 of the entire council. 
 
 "The political president controls the outward order of the councils, 
 affords, to those conferring, security from external violence, prevents 
 tumults, suppresses those quarrelling, approves the decisions of the 
 greater and better part, sanctions them by a public edict, and carries 
 them into execution. The ecclesiastical president controls the internal 
 affairs of the Church, or those particular ecclesiastical actions which per- 
 tain to the doctrine of faith, not with coercive, but with ordinate author- 
 ity, and accurately states, and clearly explains the questions to be con- 
 sidered." 
 
 (1323): " The arbiters and judges in the councils, are, in addition to 
 the presiding officers, not only bishops, teachers, and pastors, but laymen 
 also, well versed in sacred literature, godly lovers of truth and peace, 
 delegated by the churches to give their vote concerning the subjects pro- 
 posed (Acts 15 : 22, 25)." 
 
 [6] Holl. (1321): "The power to announce and convoke a council, 
 belongs to an orthodox, civil magistrate ; in the absence of whom be- 
 lievers themselves can, without injustice to the heterodox princes of their 
 
 domains, appoint an ecclesiastical assembly. Note If the magistrate 
 
 be heterodox and unbelieving, nevertheless the right and power to con- 
 
606 OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 voke councils does not cease, if the orthodox earnestly request it. But, 
 if, when it is asked, he do not assent to it, the bishops themselves, in ac- 
 cordance with the example of the apostles, can, by request as it were, 
 assemble councils (Acts 15: 2)." 
 
 Hence, the antithesis against the Roman Catholic Church : " 1. The 
 right and authority to announce councils, especially general councils, 
 does not belong to tbe Pope of Rome, but to the highest political mag- 
 istrate. 2. The president (ecclesiastical) is not necessarily the Roman 
 bishop, or his legates, but those who are chosen for this office by the suf- 
 frages of the bishops." (Quen. IV, 516.) 
 
 [7] The only principle and norm, by which to decide controverted 
 questions concerning doctrines and morals, is canonical Scripture (Deut. 
 4:2; Is. 8 : 20 ; 2 Tim. 3:15; Gal. 1:8; 6 : 16). ' 
 
 [8] Holl. (1325) : " Councils possess great authority, and this is 
 both decretory (m establishing good order, and appointing rites, and cor- 
 recting the morals of the Church, in order that all things may be done 
 decently and in order, 1 Cor. 14: 40) and decisive (in doctrines of 
 faith) ;" but the decision is " not purely judicial, but that of a servant 
 and minister, being bound to a regular method of interpreting passages 
 of Scripture (which they do not possess from the fact that they precisely 
 represent the Church universal). The authority of councils is not de- 
 rived from a perfect representation of the Catholic Church (inasmuch 
 as there never is a council that precisely represents the Church univer- 
 sal, and, therefore, there is no council absolutely universal and ascumen- 
 ical) ; but they possess it from their dependence upon Holy Scripture, 
 and from the agreement of their decrees with the same." 
 
 [9] Holl. (1325): "Although some authority is a posteriori given 
 to councils by the consent of churches existing throughout the entire 
 world" ("the councils which are received by a majority of churches, 
 are judged to possess such authority, that from them the doctrine of the 
 true Church may be inferred not obscurely"), "yet, this is not infalli- 
 ble or free from danger of erring (for those who, when out of the coun- 
 cil, are liable to mistake, remain the same even when assembled in a 
 council; but teachers of the Church, when out of the council, are liable 
 to mistake. . . . Therefore . . . )." 
 
 § 58. Of the Three Estates in the Church. 
 
 Although all the members of the Church have the same heav- 
 enly calling, their earthly calling is not the same. On the other 
 hand, they are divided into three estates, of which one (status ec- 
 
THE THREE ESTATES IN THE CHURCH. 607 
 
 clesiasticus) is called to arouse, maintain, and increase faith in 
 the Church by the preaching of the divine "Word and the admin- 
 istration of the Sacraments; the second (status politicus) to care 
 for the outward, temporal well-being of the community; both 
 these estates, therefore, minister, each in its own way, to the 
 third, that of the family {status ceconomicus), for which they are 
 to provide a well-ordered life, and which they are to aid in ful- 
 filling its spiritual calling. [1] 
 
 § 59. 1. Of the Ecclesiastical Estate, the Ministry. 
 
 As the "Word and Sacraments are the means through which 
 alone a Church can come into existence, God has willed and or- 
 dered that these means shall always be employed ; thereby he 
 has willed the office of the preaching of the Word and the ad- 
 ministration of the Sacraments. [2] This office is, therefore, one 
 of divine appointment, [3] and God has at times himself immedi- 
 ately called single individuals into it, while now he does it only 
 mediately, [4] namely, through the Church, which has received 
 from him the right and the authorization to do it. [5] The 
 whole number of those who are intrusted with this office we call 
 the Ministry. Individual teachers now must, therefore, have re- 
 ceived their call and authorization from the Church, if they are 
 legitimately to have the right to teach and administer the Sacra^ 
 ments. [6] It confers their office upon them, moreover, by the 
 solemn rite of ordination, [7] an act by which, indeed, not a 
 special supernatural power or gift is imparted to the person or- 
 dained, but which, nevertheless, in ordinary cases, dare not be 
 omitted, because order in the Church, and the example of the 
 ancient Church, require it. [8] With ordination the Church com- 
 mits to them the obligation and the right to preach the Word of 
 God and to maintain obedience to it, to dispense the Sacraments 
 and to forgive or retain to individuals their sins (potestas ordinis 
 — potestas clavium). [9] In all these functions the Minister does 
 not act in his own name, but as by the authority, so also in the 
 name of Christ; all the effect, therefore, that follows the Word 
 preached and the Sacraments administered by him, proceeds not 
 from him, but from God. [10] Thus he has also, according to 
 Matt. 16: 19; John 20: 23, the right to forgive the sins of the 
 
608 
 
 OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 penitent, and retain those of the impenitent; and he upon whom 
 this right is exercised, must recognize in this act not a mere an- 
 nouncement, but can be sure of this, that thereby his sins are 
 really forgiven or retained ; but the power to do this, the Minis- 
 ter has not of himself, but from the Lord, and he exercises this 
 power, entrusted to him, in each, particular case, only as the ser- 
 vant of the Lord. [11] The Church expects from each one to 
 whom she entrusts this power, and to whom she then obediently 
 subjects herself, that he perform all his duties with fidelity, and 
 has the right, if he fail to do this, to discipline him. [12] The 
 Church assigns to individual ministers different ranks, and estab- 
 lishes different grades in the ministry, but this is done only for 
 reasons of outward order ; and the essential rights of preaching 
 the Gospel and administering the Sacraments are possessed by all 
 alike. [13] 
 
 [1] Grh. (XII, b. 2) : " Three estates or orders appointed by God 
 in the Church, are enumerated, viz., the ecclesiastical, the political, and 
 the domestic, which also are frequently called hierarchies. The domes- 
 tic order is devoted to the multiplication of the human race ; the politi- 
 cal, to its protection ; the ecclesiastical, to its promotion to eternal sal- 
 vation. The domestic estate has been established by God against 
 wandering lusts ; the political against tyranny and robbery ; the ecclesi- 
 astical against heresies and corruptions of doctrine." 
 
 [2] Conf. Aug. (Art. V): "For the obtaining of this faith (of jus- 
 tification), the ministry of teaching the Gospel, and administering the 
 Sacraments, was instituted. For, by the Word and Sacraments, the 
 Holy Spirit is given ; who worketh faith where and when it pleaseth 
 God in those that hear the Gospel. . . . They condemn the Anabap- 
 tists and others, who imagine that the Holy Spirit is given to men with- 
 out the outward Word, through their own preparations and works." 
 
 Br. (785) : "For the collection and preservation of the Church it is 
 necessary that certain men discharge the office of preaching the Word 
 and administering the Sacraments ; in order that, through these means, 
 faith may be conferred upon men, and when conferred may be strength- 
 ened and increased. And this is the office, which is called the minis- 
 try of the Church." 
 
 Grh. (XIII, 224) : " The ministry of the Church is a sacred and 
 public office divinely appointed, and intrusted, through a legitimate 
 call, to certain men, in order that being instructed they may teach the 
 
THE CALL TO THE MINISTRY. 609 
 
 Word of God with peculiar power, may administer the Sacraments, 
 and preserve Church discipline, for the purpose of effecting the conver- 
 sion and salvation of men, and truly advancing the glory of God." 
 
 [3] Hutt. (Loc. Th., 186) : " The ministry of the Church has been 
 established certainly not by man, but by God himself, John 20 : 21 ; 
 Matt. 28: 19, 20; Mark 16 : 15." Ap. Conf., XIII, 11 : " The min- 
 istry of the Word has the command of God, and has glorious promises, 
 Eom. 1: 16; Is. 55: 11." 
 
 [4] Holl. (1332) : "By the divine call is here understood the ap- 
 pointment of a certain and suitable person to the ministry of the Church, 
 with the right to teach in public, to administer the Sacraments, and ex- 
 ercise ecclesiastical discipline, made by God either alone or by the in- 
 tervening judicial aid of men." 
 
 Br. (787) : " Moreover, God calls men to the ecclesiastical office, 
 sometimes immediately (as Moses and the most of the prophets in the 
 Old Testament were called, and likewise the apostles in the New Tes- 
 tament), i. e., by no intervening judicial aid of other men; and at 
 other times mediately, namely, through the Church, which, in the name 
 of God, commits this office to certain persons." (Holl. (1333): "An 
 immediate call is not to be expected in the Church to-day.") Concern- 
 ing the difference between the mediate and the immediate call, Grh. 
 (XII, b. 75) : " The difference between the mediate and immediate 
 call consists always and only in this, that the former is effected through 
 ordinary means, divinely appointed for this purpose, but the latter 
 through God himself, who manifests his will concerning the immediate 
 call of a person, either by himself or through some representative." 
 The mediate call, therefore, is to be considered no less a divine call. 
 Grh. (XII, b. 79) : «* For (1) It is referred to God as its author, Ps. 
 68 : 11 ; Is. 41 : 27 ; Jer. 3 : 15 ; 23 : 4 ; 1 Cor. 12 : 28 ; Eph. 4 : 11. 
 (2) It is based upon apostolic authority, Acts 14: 23; 1 Tim. 4: 14; 
 2 Tim. 1:6; 2:2; 1 Tim. 3:2; Rom. 15 : 18 ; 1 Tim. 5 : 21 ; Acts 
 20: 28; Col. 4: 17. (3) The mediate call rejoices in God's saving 
 promises, 1 Tim. 4: 16 ; 2 Cor. 3:6; Eph. 4: 12. And, indeed, es- 
 sentially the same promises belong to those thus called. Grh. (XII, 
 b. 81) : " But if the mediate call, therefore, is not less divine than the 
 immediate, it will follow that the promises made by God to those who 
 have been immediately called, concerning the fruit and success of the 
 ministry, concerning protection in dangers, concerning the reward of 
 labors, etc., belong in their own way to those also who have been medi- 
 ately called by God. We do not deny that the prophets and apostles, 
 as those immediately called, had many and great prerogatives, such as 
 
610 OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 the privilege of not erring, the right to teach in a plurality of places, 
 more abundant gifts, peculiar charisms, fuller promises concerning the 
 success of the call and protection, etc. ; yet, with respect to the minis- 
 try of the Church and the functions of teaching, both the mediately 
 and the immediately called sustain one and the same office in the 
 Church, and, therefore, the promises concerning divine aid, and divine 
 virtue and efficacy in the ministry, can be referred in their own way to 
 the mediately called." ... 
 
 The " mixed coll, by which God himself names a certain person, but 
 yet wills that he be called through others, as representatives (thus 
 Aaron through Moses)/' is not regarded by most of the Dogmaticians 
 as constituting a distinct species. 
 
 [5] Holl. (1334): " The less principal cause constituting the min- 
 istry, is the Church, to which the right has been granted by God of 
 electing, ordaining, and calling suitable ministers of the divine Word, 
 nevertheless with the observance of becoming order in the exercise of 
 this right, 1 Cor. 14: 33" (Id. (1335): "Therefore the examination, 
 ordination, and inauguration belong to the presbytery ; the nomination, 
 presentation, and confirmation of the call, by means of writing, to the 
 magistrate ; and the consent, vote, and approval to the people.") Br. 
 (788): "After it has been planted, the right and power to appoint min- 
 isters belong to the Church. For she has the keys of the kingdom of 
 heaven, Matt. 16: 19; 18: 18, given her as a Bride, by Christ, her 
 husband; and, therefore, as it is her prerogative to open and close the 
 kingdom of heaven, so is it also her prerogative to appoint ministers, 
 through whom she may open and close [the same]. And, if we con- 
 sider that the Church is a republic, and that the ministers of the Word 
 are, so to speak, the magistrates or conductors of public affairs, upon 
 whom the care of the whole republic rests, it is easily understood that 
 the power to appoint them is vested, per se and in the very nature of the 
 case, in the whole Church; nor does it belong to any one part, unless, by 
 the common consent of all, it be transferred to some one part." (It is not 
 intended, therefore, hereby to lay down the law that, in practice, all the 
 estates of the Church must participate in the choice of the individual 
 teacher. Holl. (1334): "We must distinguish between the right to 
 call ministers and the exercise of the right. The right to call belongs 
 to the whole Church, and all its ranks and members. But the exercise 
 of the right varies, according to the diverse agreement and custom of 
 the particular Church.") According to the doctrine of the Symbolical 
 Books, also, the power of the keys is in the hands of the whole Church. 
 Art. Smalcald, "Of the Power and Primacy of the Pope," 24: "In 
 
THE SIGNIFICANCE OF ORDINATION. 611 
 
 addition to these things, it is necessary to confess that the keys do not 
 belong to the person of a certain man, but to the Church, as many very 
 clear and very strong arguments testify. For Christ, speaking of the 
 keys, Matt. 18: 19, adds: 'Where two or three are gathered together 
 in my name,' etc. Therefore he gave the keys to the Church primarily 
 and immediately ; just as also, for this reason, the Church has primarily 
 the right to call. 66. Therefore, when the regular bishops become 
 enemies of the Church, or are unwilling to impart ordination, the 
 churches retain their own right. 67. For wherever a church is, there 
 also is the right to administer the Gospel. And this right is a gift given 
 only to the Church, which no human authority can remove from the 
 Church. . . . Where, therefore, there is a true church, there there 
 must be the right to elect and ordain ministers. . . .69. Lastly, the 
 sentence of Peter (1 Pet. 2:9), ' Ye are a royal priesthood,' also con- 
 firms this. These words pertain to the true Church ; and since this has 
 a priesthood, it certainly must have the right to elect and ordain minis- 
 ters." Ap. Conf. (XIII, 12): "The Church has the command to ap- 
 point ministers, which ought to be most gratifying to us, because we 
 know that God approves the ministry and is present in the ministry." 
 In conformity with this, the Art. Smalcald (ibid. 11) likewise say: 
 "Paul (1 Cor. 3 : 6) makes ministers equal, and teaches that the Church 
 is above the ministers. Wherefore superiority and lordship over the 
 Church and the rest of the ministers are not ascribed to Peter." 
 
 [6] Coxf. Aug. (XIV): "Concerning ecclesiastical orders, they 
 teach that no man should publicly in the Church teach or administer 
 the Sacraments except he be rightly called." (Htjtt. "(1) On ac- 
 count of God's command, Jer. 23: 31 ; Heb. 5:4; Rom. 10: 15. (2) 
 For the sake of good order and the peace of the Church, 1 Cor. 14: 40. 
 (3) For the sake of certainty of doctrine, that it may be evident of what 
 nature it is, and by whom it has been received, there is necessity for an 
 examination and testimonials as to the doctrine. (4) For the sake of 
 the conscience of the teacher, that he may be certain that Christ's grace 
 is with him, and that the hearers also may know that they are hearing 
 an ambassador of God, 2 Cor. 5: 20.") 
 
 [7] Grh. (XII, b. 145): "Ordination is a public and solemn decla- 
 ration or attestation, through which the ministry of the Church is com- 
 mitted to a suitable person, called thereto by the Church, to which he 
 is consecrated by prayer and the laying on of hands, rendered more cer- 
 tain of his lawful call, and publicly, in the sight of the entire Church, 
 solemnly and seriously admonished concerning his duty." Concerning 
 the person to be ordained, Grh. (XII, b. 159): " Our Churches do not 
 
612 OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 approve of the disorder and anarchy of the An abaptists, but recognize 
 distinct grades among ministers ; yet, meanwhile, we deny that the 
 power of ordaining is, according to divine right, so confined to the epis- 
 copal office that it cannot be exercised by presbyters, when the necessity 
 and advantage of the Church especially demand it. The practice itself 
 bears witness that, for the sake of good order, we commit ordination to 
 the bishops or superintendents alone, who are called bishops, not only 
 with respect to the flock intrusted to them, or their hearers, but also 
 with respect to other preachers, viz., presbyters and deacons, the over- 
 sight of whom has been intrusted to them ; yet, meanwhile, we do not 
 recognize any such distinction between bishops and presbyters, as though 
 the former alone, according to a divine right and the appointment of 
 the Lord, have a right to ordain preachers, from which the rest of the 
 presbyters have been excluded in such a manner, that they cannot ad- 
 minister the rite of ordination even when necessity demands, as when 
 bishops are not present or are neglecting their duty ; but we say that, 
 according to an ecclesiastical custom, introduced for the sake of good 
 order, the power of ordaining has been left to the bishops, although from 
 this presbyters have not been purely and absolutely excluded.'' 
 
 Of the ceremonies to be observed in ordination, Grh. (XII, b. 163) : 
 "In our churches we retain the laying on of hands, and reject the 
 anointing. We make use of the x^podeala, not as though it were a sac- 
 ramental symbol, appointed by Christ himself, and commanded to be 
 employed in this rite, but we use this ceremony according to our free- 
 dom, both because it descends to us from the practice of the Apostolic 
 Church (Acts 6: 6; 1 Tim. 4: 14; 5: 22; 2 Tim. 1:6),. . . and 
 because it affords useful admonitions." . . . 
 
 Ordination is, therefore, no Sacrament, Grh. (XII, b. 147): "The 
 belief of our churches is this, that ordination can be called a Sacrament, 
 if the word be received in a wide sense ; yet, if we wish to speak most 
 accurately, in such a manner that only that be termed a Sacrament 
 which has an outward element or sacramental symbol, appointed in the 
 New Testament by Christ himself, to which has been attached the 
 promise of grace, for offering, applying, and sealing the remission of 
 sins, according to which sense and signification Baptism and the Eu- 
 charist* are called Sacraments; in such a sense, signification, and re- 
 spect, we deny that ordination is a Sacrament." 
 
 On the other hand, Apol. (VII, 11) : "But if the word be under- 
 stood of the ministry of the Word, we should not seriously object to call 
 ordination a Sacrament. For the ministry of the Word has the com- 
 mand of God, and glorious promises. ... If ordination be under- 
 
IS ORDINATION NECESSARY? 613 
 
 stood in this manner, we do not object to call the laying on of hands a 
 Sacrament. For the Church has the command to appoint ministers, 
 which ought to be most gratifying to us, because we know that God ap- 
 proves the ministry, and is present in the ministry. And it is of advan- 
 tage, so far as can be done, to adorn the ministry of the Word with 
 every kind of praise, in opposition to fanatical men, who dream that the 
 Holy Ghost is given, not through the Word, but through their own 
 preparations." (Cf. § 53, note 5.) 
 
 [8] Grh. (XII, b. 168): " We do not deny that, in ordination, the 
 gifts of the Holy Ghost, necessary for the discharge of the duties of the 
 ministry of the Church, are conferred and increased; yet, meanwhile, 
 we make a distinction between the grace of reconciliation, or of the re- 
 mission of sins, and the grace of ordination, since many receive the 
 grace of ordination who nevertheless do not receive the grace of recon- 
 ciliation; secondly, we say that the bestowal and increase of the gifts, 
 necessary for the ministry, are by no means to be ascribed to the laying 
 on of hands as a sacramental symbol truly so called, and divinely ap- 
 pointed, but to the prayers of the Church and the presbytery, to which 
 the promise of hearing has been divinely made." Holl. (1342): 
 "The necessity of ordination is ordinate, for the sake of good order or 
 decorum, and because of the divine command (Acts 13: 2), although 
 the number and form of the ceremonies vary according to the judgment 
 of the Church; nevertheless, the necessity is not absolute." 
 
 Grh. (XII, b. 146): "We deny that ordination is necessary, by 
 reason of any special divine command, as this cannot be produced, or 
 of any such effect as the Papists ascribe to it, viz., as though by it any 
 indelible character were imprinted, or as though it conferred, ex opere 
 operato, gifts requisite to the ministry, concerning which no promise 
 can be adduced from the sayings of Christ and the apostles, or by reason 
 of any absolute and pure necessity." . . . 
 
 [9] Be. (792) : " The ministry of the Church bears with it the power 
 and office (1) of teaching publicly, and administering the Sacraments 
 according to order; (2) the power and function of remitting and retain- 
 ing sins." The former is termed the power of the order (potestas 
 ordinis); the latter, the power of the keys {potestas clavium, called also 
 potestas jnrisdictionis). 
 
 • Conf. Aug. (Of Church Power, VII, 5): " Now, their judgment is 
 this, that the power of the keys, or the power of the bishops, by the 
 rule of the Gospel, is a power or commandment from God, of preaching 
 the Gospel, of remitting or retaining sins, and of administering the Sac- 
 raments. For, Christ doth send his apostles, with this charge, John 
 
614 OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 20 : 21 ; Mark 16 : 15. This power is put in execution ""only by teach- 
 ing or preaching the Gospel, and administering the Sacraments, either 
 to many or to single individuals, in accordance with their call, for there- 
 by not corporeal things but eternal are granted, viz., righteousness 
 eternal, the Holy Ghost, life eternal ; these things cannot be obtained 
 but by the ministry of the Word and Sacraments." Grh. (XIII, 16) : 
 " The power of jurisdiction consists in the use of the keys. But the 
 power of the keys is twofold, loosing and binding, Matt. 16 : 19 ; John 
 20 : 23. For, although the ministry of the Word, by which sins are 
 loosed and bound, is one, wherefore, also, in a generic signification, one 
 key is effectual to open and to close the kingdom of heaven ; neverthe- 
 less, according to the diversity of objects, means and effects, one key is 
 said to be a loosing key, by which penitents are absolved from their sins 
 and heaven is opened to them ; and another binding, by which to the 
 impenitent sins are retained, and heaven is closed against them. The 
 former is called absolution ; the latter excommunication. Both are exer- 
 cised either publicly or privately. Absolution is public, when to all 
 who truly repent, the remission of sins, for Christ's sake, is declared 
 from the Gospel ; private, when sins are remitted to some penitent in 
 particular. Excommunication is public, when to all the impenitent and 
 unbelieving, the w r rath of God and eternal condemnation are declared 
 from the law ; private, when to any obstinately wicked one in particular 
 the retention of sins is announced. With respect to degrees, excom- 
 munication is said to be twofold, viz., the less and the greater. The 
 former is exclusion or suspension from the use of the Lord's Supper ; 
 the latter is expulsion from the communion of the Church ; the former 
 is called Kadaipecig [purifying], the latter, a(popca/i6g [excommunication in 
 the proper sense]. To the latter extreme degree of ecclesiastical cen- 
 sure we dare not progress hastily, without serious deliberation, and with- 
 out the consent of the Church, and especially of the Christian magis- 
 trate, but the order prescribed by Christ, Matt. 18 : 15, must be care- 
 fully observed." Id. (XIII, 109) : "As in the political and the 
 domestic estates, so also in the ecclesiastical estate, a certain discipline 
 is required, without which, just as in the former subjects and domestics 
 cannot be kept in their duty, so also in the latter the hearers. The 
 objects of Church discipline are men who have been received into the 
 house of God, and the family of Christ, and who sin, Matt. 18 : 15 ; 
 Gal. 5:1, who must be rebuked, chided, and corrected, in order that 
 they may return into the way and perform their duty, according to the 
 requirement of the Word. Such falls are twofold, viz., with respect to 
 doctrine, and with respect to morals." . . . 
 
DUTY OF OBEDIENCE TO MINISTERS. 615 
 
 [10] Ap. Conf. (of the Church, 28) : " Nor is the efficacy of the 
 Sacraments destroyed, because they are administered by the unworthy ; 
 because they present before us the person of Christ by virtue of the call of 
 the Church, and do not present before us their own persons, as Christ 
 testifies (Luke 10: 16): 'He that heareth you, heareth me.' When 
 they offer the Word of Christ, when they offer the Sacraments, they 
 offer them in the stead and place of Christ." Grh. (XIII, 15): "Min- 
 isters do not act except instrumentally (bpyaviK&g), and, therefore, ought 
 to adapt their actions to the divine judgment and command." 
 
 [11] Holl. (1348) : " The power which ministers of the Church 
 have to remit sins is not absolute {avroKparopiKrj), or principal and inde- 
 pendent (which belongs to God alone, against whom alone sin is com- 
 mitted), but ministerial and delegated (StaKovatf^ by which to contrite 
 and penitent sinners they remit all sins without any reservation of guilt 
 or punishment, not only loropiKug, or by way of signification and declara- 
 tion, but also effectually and really, yet bpyaviK&g (instrumentally)." 
 
 The remission is "-delegated, Matt. 16 : 19 ; John 20 : 23. Therefore, 
 the power to remit sins depends upon Christ (1) with respect to form, 
 because it is a delegated power, and therefore such only, as to nature 
 and extent, as God has delegated ; (2) with respect to the norm, since 
 the minister of the Church cannot absolve sinners according to his own 
 judgment, but according to the norm of the divine judgment ; (3) with 
 respect to exercise, because in the of act absolution God concurs with 
 the ministers and absolves through them ; (4) with respect to efficacy, 
 because the minister cannot absolve, except by delegated virtue and 
 power, and, therefore, by that which is subordinated to the principal 
 cause." 
 
 Not " by way of signification," but " effectively ; for they really bind 
 and loose, and do not merely declare the binding and loosing that has oc- 
 curred in heaven ; because he who receives a key to unlock and open 
 does not show that another has opened, but he himself opens. For the 
 key is not the same as the declaration of the act of opening, and to unlock 
 is not the same as merely to declare that another has unlocked. Through 
 the Word of God, ministers really and effectively convert, regenerate, 
 etc.; therefore, they also really and effectively remit sins." 
 
 Br. (798): " That which is declared by the voice of the minister is 
 truly. presented and offered by means of his voice to the contrite and be- 
 lieving, or is confirmed by God, as certainly as though Christ himself were 
 to say to the penitent, what he said to the paralytic, Matt. 9 : 2." Hutt. 
 (Loc. c. Th., p. 765): "This absolution has its dependence upon con- 
 fession. Therefore, it never errs, nor are the words scattered to the 
 
616 OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 wind. For, inasmuch as absolution always either silently or expressly 
 presupposes a condition of confession, it happens that absolution can, in- 
 deed, be invalid or ineffectual, yet it is never false ; since it is declared 
 by the minister only under the condition of a confession that has been 
 properly and sincerely made." Grh. (VI, 298): " Neither can any one 
 present this argument in opposition, that in this manner all certainty of 
 absolution is removed, if it be said to depend upon the condition of re- 
 pentance and faith ; for we do not say that the absolution must be 
 judged from the extent of the contrition or of the faith, but we do say 
 that sincere contrition, and faith that is true and not hypocritical, are 
 necessary ; and now, indeed, every one can examine himself as to 
 whether he truly recognize and detest his sins, and whether he truly be- 
 lieve in Christ." 
 
 Holl. (1349) : " The power that ministers of the Church have to 
 retain sins is not principal and independent, but ministerial and dele- 
 gated {the right to the hey of binding Christ has intrusted to the Church, as 
 the spiritual mother of a family. The exercise of this right he has in- 
 trusted to the apostles and their successors, Matt. 18 : 18 ; John 20 : 23. 
 Since, therefore, the power of the key of binding has been delegated, the 
 ministers of the Church cannot bind impenitent sinners according to 
 their own judgment, but in accordance with the norm of the divine 
 judgment), by which they deny the remission of sins to obdurate, pub- 
 licly infamous and notorious sinners, or only prohibit them from the use 
 of the Holy Supper ; or, by the consent of the Church council, actually 
 cast them out of the society of the Church ; or, by an effectual declara- 
 tion, hand them over to Satan, that they may truly repent and be recon- 
 ciled to God and the Church." 
 
 [12] Conf. Aug. (XXVIII, 21): "Again, by the Gospel, or, as 
 they term it, by divine right, bishops, as bishops, that is, those who have 
 the administration of the Word and Sacraments committed to them, 
 have no other jurisdiction at all, but only to remit sin, also to take cog- 
 nizance of doctrine, and to reject doctrine inconsistent with the Gospel, 
 and to exclude from the communion of the Church, without human 
 force, but by the Word, those whose wickedness is known. And herein, 
 of necessity, the churches ought, by divine right, to render obedience unto 
 them, according to the saying of Christ, Luke 10: 16. But, when they 
 teach or determine anything contrary to the Gospel, then haue the 
 churches a commandment of God, which forbiddeth obedience to them, 
 Matt. 7 : 15 ; Gal. 1 : 9; 2 Cor. 13 : 8-10." Holl. (1351): " A min- 
 ister of the Church should cultivate piety with his whole heart (1 Tim. 
 3: 2), and if his impiety be notorious, the censure of the Church ought 
 
DUTY OF OBEDIENCE TO MINISTERS. 617 
 
 to be employed against him, 1 Tim. 5 : 20. Yet his impiety does not 
 derogate from the efficacy of the doctrine which he presents from the 
 Word of God." (" Efficacy of doctrine does not depend upon the min- 
 ister, but upon the Holy Ghost, who is inseparably joined to the Word 
 of God. Wherefore, by whomsoever it be preached, the divine Word is 
 and remains the power of God to every one believing, Rom. 1 : 16.") 
 
 Grh. (XIII, 214) under the caption, " Things hostile to the Minis- 
 try of the Word," discusses the chief hindrances to the efficiency of the 
 Gospel ministry. He makes a distinction between the faults of the 
 pastors and the faults of the hearers. Of the former he enumerates : 
 "(1) abuse of the office, and of the power of the keys; (2) corruptions 
 of doctrine, which degenerate into heresies, if obstinacy be added ; 
 (4) faults of character and life." Among the faults of hearers, he gives 
 prominence to "(1) the contempt of the ministry . . . (2) KacaapoivaTTia, 
 by which, indeed, they claim, for the political magistrate, absolute power 
 over the ministers of the Church ; they decide that the regulation of 
 the ministry belongs to regal affairs, and ascribe to him the power, 
 according to his pleasure and without the consent of the Church, to ap- 
 point and reject ministers, and to prescribe laws according to his own 
 discretion ; they refuse to submit themselves to Church discipline, and 
 strive to put a muzzle upon the Holy Ghost when he censures their 
 errors and crimes." A heresy he thus defines : " A heresy is any pri- 
 vate opinion, which any one selects for his reception in preference to a 
 Christian doctrine and the Catholic faith, and obstinately defends." 
 (Id., 222): " That any one should be a heretic, properly so called, it is 
 necessary (1) that he be a person received into the visible Church by 
 the Sacrament of Baptism ; (2) that he err in the faith ; whether he in- 
 troduce an unheard of error or embrace one received from another, 
 although the former seems to be peculiar to a heresiarcn, and the latter 
 to a heretic; (3) that the error directly conflict with the very founda- 
 tion of the faith ; (4) that to the error there be joined wickedness and 
 obstinacy, through which, though frequently admonished, he obstinately 
 defends his error ; (5) that he excite dissensions and scandals in the 
 Church, and rend its unity." Gerhard, with Augustine, thus dis- 
 tinguishes heresy and schism : " Heretics violate the faith itself, by be- 
 lieving false things of God ; but schismatics, by* wicked dissensions, 
 break away from brotherly love, although they may believe those things 
 which we believe" (221.) 
 
 [13] Holl. (1351) : " For the sake of good order it is useful and 
 prudent that, corresponding to the disparity of gifts, there should be, 
 among the ministers of the Church, distinct degrees of dignity and in- 
 40 
 
618 OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 fluence, 1 Cor. 14: 40; Eph. 4: 11." Quen. (IV, 396): "Mean- 
 while, we say that the same power of the ministry in preaching the 
 Word and administering the Sacraments and power of jurisdiction 
 consisting in the use of the keys, belong to all the ministers of the 
 Church." 
 
 §60. 2. Of the Political Estate ;\Y\ The Civil Authority. 
 
 The civil authority, no less than the ministry, is an estate ap- 
 pointed by God. [2] The power intrusted to it, with all its pre- 
 rogatives, is derived, therefore, from him ; [3] through it God 
 desires to promote the temporal welfare of men. [4] Its primary 
 duty, therefore, is to watch over the preservation of outward 
 order and good behavior, [5] and it has the right and the duty of 
 operating in this direction through laws which it is to enact, ac- 
 cording to its own judgment, yet without encroaching upon nat- 
 ural or divine right. [6] This mission assigned to the civil 
 authority has, however, as its ultimate aim the promotion of the 
 prosperity of the Church, for the outward welfare aimed at by 
 the civil authority would of itself have no significance. [7] 
 Therefore the civil authority has, at the same time, an immedi- 
 ate calling to fulfil in regard to the Church (officium circa sacra)) 
 it is hence also to aid and protect the institutions of Christianity, 
 to ward off all hostile attacks by means of the external power 
 committed to it, and to withstand all injurious influences. [8] It 
 is not to interfere, however, with the internal doctrinal or disci- 
 plinary affairs of the Church. [9] 
 
 [1] Grh. (XIII, 228): "The term magistratus is taken in a two- 
 fold sense: (1) abstractly, for the power and authority themselves, with 
 which those are divinely endowed to whom the government has been in- 
 trusted : (2) concretely, for the persons who exercise the magistracy 
 and are endowed with the power to govern." 
 
 [2] Holl. (1353) : " The efficient principal cause of the magistracy 
 is the triune God (Rom. 13: 1; Prov. 8 : 15 ; Dan. 2: 21), who in- 
 trusts to certain persons the office of magistrate, either immediately 
 (Ex, 3 : 10 ; Numb. 27 : 18 ; 1 Sam. 9 : 15) or mediately (John 19 : 
 11)." 
 
 Id. (1354) : " To-day, by God's control, suitable persons attain to 
 the office of magistrate, either by election, or by succession, or by right- 
 ful taking possession of it." 
 
THE CIVIL AUTHORITY. 619 
 
 [3] Grh. (XIII, 308) : " From Rom. 13 : 1, etc., it is evident that 
 the magistrate has been endowed -with certain power." But " the 
 power of the magistrate is not absolute, unlimited, and unconditional, 
 but it is restricted by laws and the norm of a higher power. For, since 
 the magistrate has received his power from God, he is under obligation 
 to recognize God as his superior, and, in the use of his power, to con- 
 form to his will and laws. When, therefore, statesmen ascribe absolute 
 power to the supreme magistrate, this must be received not uncondi- 
 tionally, nor with respect to the higher power, namely, God, . . . but 
 only with respect to the lower magistrates." 
 
 Political power consists " (1) in ordaining in such a manner as to 
 produce honorable and salutary laws, pertaining to the advantage of 
 subjects and of the state" (legislative power); " (2) in judging so as, 
 in cases for trial, to make the decision and administer justice to subjects 
 according to the norm of the laws" (judicial power); " (3) in executing 
 so as to adorn those obedient to honorable laws with rewards, and to 
 punish the disobedient and negligent by means of penalties " (executive 
 power). Hence the right of the sword, Gen. 9 : 6. 
 
 [4] Grh. (XIII, 225) : " Because of the fall of those first created, 
 the human race has lost not only the spiritual and eternal blessings of 
 the life to come, but also the bodily and outward comforts of this life ; 
 yet God, out of wonderful and ever unspeakable kindness, because of 
 the intercession of his Son, has not only restored and renewed the 
 former, but also the latter, and has appointed means for preserving 
 them." 
 
 "Through the political magistrate, (God) preserves peace and out- 
 ward tranquillity, administers civil justice, and protects our property, 
 reputation, and persons." (lb., 226.) 
 
 [5] Grh. (XIII, 225) : " By means of the former" (the civil mag- 
 istrate) " both outward discipline and public peace and tranquillity are 
 preserved." 
 
 Hutt. (Loc. Th., 279) : " The chief duties of the civil magistrate 
 are : (1) to pay attention to both tables of the decalogue, so far as they 
 pertain to outward discipline ; (2) to make enactments concerning civil 
 and domestic affairs, harmonizing with divine and natural law ; (3) to 
 diligently see to it that the laws that have been published be carried 
 into execution ; (4) to inflict punishments upon the delinquent, accord- 
 ing to the nature of the offence ; to assist the obedient and bestow upon 
 them rewards." 
 
 Holl. (1366) : " The civil magistrate has been ordained for the 
 public good, and this is fourfold : (1) Ecclesiastical, for kings are the 
 
620 OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 nursing fathers of the Church, and the bishops outside of the temple. 
 (2) Civil y by guarding the interests of citizens, and repelling foreign 
 enemies from the boundaries of the country. (3) Moral, in so far as he 
 enacts wholesome laws, by which subjects are held to their duty, so as 
 to lead a peaceable life in godliness and honesty, 1 Tim. 2 : 2. (4) 
 Natural, by which rulers provide for the support and other necessaries 
 of subjects; for example, Pharaoh, Gen. 41 : 34." 
 
 [6] Hutt. (Loc. Th., 285) : " Christians are necessarily under obli- 
 gation to obey their magistrates and laws, except when they command 
 us to sin ; then we must obey God rather than men, Acts 5 : 29." 
 
 [7] Grh. (XIII, 225) : " The magistracy has been established by 
 God, no less than the ministry, for the collection, preservation, and ex- 
 tension of the Church, inasmuch as by means of it both outward dis- 
 cipline and public peace and tranquillity are preserved, without which 
 the ministry of the Church could not readily perform its duty, and the 
 collection and extension of the Church could scarcely have a place, 1 
 Tim. 2 : 2." 
 
 The magistracy is therefore termed " a wall and shield to the Church, 
 Ps. 47 : 10. For not only by this most firm wall are our bodies and 
 property surrounded, but a protection is also afforded the Church, while 
 the rage of those is restrained who desire to overturn all sacred things, 
 in order that they may freely indulge their own lusts." Furthermore, 
 " a nursing father to the Church, Is. 49 : 23." . . . "Outward discip- 
 line is maintained, justice is administered, tranquillity and favorable 
 times are protected by the civil estate, to the end that, by the Word of 
 God, through the ministry, a Church may be collected out of the human 
 race. For, since by and since the fall, the human race had been so 
 miserably and dreadfully corrupted by sin, that, without a public rule, 
 all things in it would be in confusion and disorder, God also established 
 governments for the sake of the Church." . . . 
 
 [8] Holl. (1361): " The magistracy is employed with sacred affairs, 
 by carefully observing and performing those things which ought to be 
 believed and done by all men who are to be saved, Ps. 2: 10-12, and 
 by directing the Church and the Christian religion in their external 
 government." 
 
 There belong specifically thereto (Br., 809): "The appointing of 
 suitable ministers of the Church, the erection and preservation of schools 
 and houses of worship, as well as the providing for the honorable sup- 
 port of ministers, the appointing of visitations and councils, the framing 
 and maintenance of the laws of the Church, and the controlling of the 
 revenues of the Church and the preservation of Church discipline, the 
 
THE DOMESTIC ESTATE. 621 
 
 trial of heretical ministers, as also of those of had character, and all 
 other similar persons belonging to the churches and schools, and the 
 compelling them to appear before a court, providing for the punishment 
 of those convicted of heresies or crimes, and the abrogation of heresies 
 that are manifest and have been condemned by the Church, and of 
 idolatrous forms or worship, so that the Church be cleansed from them." 
 
 [9] Holl. (1362): "The inner economy and government of sacred 
 things, consisting in the doctrine of the Word, in absolution from sins, 
 and the lawful administration of the Sacraments, are peculiar to the 
 ministers of the Church. The magistrate cannot claim them for him- 
 self without committing crime." 
 
 " The civil magistrate has not the power of a master builder in regard 
 to sacred affairs, equally with, and without any distinction from, civil 
 affairs." 
 
 § 61. 3. The Domestic Estate. 
 The family constitutes the third estate in the Church. In this 
 we distinguish the marriage relation, that of children to parents 
 and of servants to their masters. [1] 
 
 1. The marriage relation [2] was appointed and authorized by 
 God ; [3] through this the propagation of the human race was to 
 be secured in the manner that was right and well-pleasing in the 
 sight of God. [4] While, accordingly, the Church regards this 
 estate as sanctified, she declares this also by the solemn rite of 
 marriage, by- which she publicly sanctions the matrimonial life 
 of those who wish to enter into this estate. [5] As, however, 
 marriage constitutes the closest bond of spiritual and bodily 
 communion, it is also in itself indissoluble, and a divorce of those 
 who have entered this estate can take place only when one of the 
 parties has already practically rendered the continuance of the 
 marriage life impossible by adultery or malicious desertion. [6] 
 
 2. " The paternal relation is the natural connection of parents 
 with children, divinely instituted for the education of offspring 
 and the well-being of the entire family." Holl. (1383.) 
 
 3. " The servile estate is the legitimate relation between mas- 
 ters and servants, divinely instituted for mutual advantage." 
 Holl. (1384.) 
 
 The last two relations are not further discussed by the Dog- 
 maticians in this connection, as they have treated of them at 
 large in the exposition of the decalogue. 
 
622 OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 [1] Br. (816): "The third estate occurring within the Church, and 
 which is as it were the seminary of the ecclesiastical and political orders, 
 is the domestic, which embraces conjugal, 'paternal, and servile associa- 
 tion ; " "for from domestic association some come forth who are to be 
 brought into the ministry of the Church, and others who are to be 
 brought into the office of the civil magistrate." 
 
 [2] Holl. (1367) : " Marriage is the indissoluble union of one man 
 and woman, according to divine institution, made by the mutual consent 
 of both, for the begetting of offspring and mutual assistance in life." 
 
 Holl. (ib.): "The primary and supreme efficient cause of marriage 
 is the Triune God, inasmuch as marriage, abstractly considered, and in 
 a general way, as to its nature, was immediately instituted by him. The 
 second and subordinate causes of contracting marriage, are the husband 
 and wife themselves and their parents, in whose power they are, agree- 
 ing to the marriage." (Grh. XV, 67 : " The consent is not the form 
 [see Appendix] of marriage. As I correctly infer that the builder is 
 not the form of a house, but its efficient cause ; inasmuch as if the builder 
 were to depart or to die, the house would not at once fall into ruins ; so 
 the consent is not the form of marriage, but its efficient cause, because, 
 if the consent cease, a marriage that has been ratified and consummated 
 is not dissolved.") Id. (386): " We affirm that consent is not the form 
 of marriage, but that, from the consent^ the legitimate and indissoluble 
 union of one man and woma^ into one flesh originated, or, what is the 
 same, that the conjugal union and relation has itself originated from the 
 mutual consent of both parties to become one flesh." 
 
 Holl. (1371): "The material or the subjects of marriage are the 
 persons who are united in marriage, two in number, one man and woman 
 (Gen. 2 : 24; Matt. 19 : 4, 5 ; 1 Cor. 7 : 2, 4), suitable to attain the 
 ends of marriage, and placed beyond the prohibited degrees of consan- 
 guinity and affinity (Lev. 18: 7)." 
 
 [3] Htttt. (Loc. Th., 287): " God himself is the author of marriage. 
 Gen. 2: 18." 
 
 [4] Quen. (IV, 453): "The ultimate and supreme end is the glory of 
 God. The subordinate end, is (1) the preservation of the human race, 
 by the begetting and education of offspring, Gen. 1 : 27, 28 ; 1 Tim. 2: 
 15 ; (2) mutual assistance, Gen. 2 : 18 ; (3) a remedy against wander- 
 ing desires, 1 Cor. 7 : 2." 
 
 [5] Grh. (XV, 396): " The blessing of the ministry is necessary for 
 rightly entering upon marriage, not from any special divine command, 
 nor because of the nature of marriage, as though it were not complete 
 without the consecration of the ministry, but on account of the ecclesi- 
 
ONLY SCRIPTURAL GROUND FOR DIVORCE. 623 
 
 astical and civil arrangement introduced with reference to the public 
 advantage and honor. The blessing, by the ministry, of those newly 
 married, is not required for the essence of the thing itself, viz., of marriage, 
 but for a public witness of it, so that it may be evident to all that the 
 marriage is contracted lawfully and honorably. ... In the forum of 
 conscience and before God, a marriage is true and valid which has been 
 entered upon with the legitimate and matrimonial consent of both par- 
 ties, even though the blessing of the ministry be not added ; but in the 
 outer forum, a marriage is not considered true and valid, which has not 
 been confirmed in the sight of the Church." 
 
 Holl. (1371): ''The solemn blessing or union, made according to a 
 usual rite, by the minister, pertains not to the contraction, but to the 
 consummation of Christian marriage. (1) That the lawful marriage of 
 those making the contract may be openly manifest. (2) That those 
 making the contract may be admonished concerning the holy and indis- 
 soluble bond of marriage, the divine blessing, conjugal duties, and the 
 endurance of troubles. (3) That newly married persons may be com- 
 mended to God, the author of marriage, by means of earnest prayers." 
 
 [6] Holl. (1380): "The conjugal bond between husband and wife, 
 as long as they remain alive, is in itself indissoluble, both on account of 
 mutual consent, and especially on account of the divine institution, Gen. 
 2: 24; Matt. 19: 6." Br. (835): "Meanwhile, in two cases, divorce 
 or the dissolution of legitimate and valid marriage, as to the conjugal 
 bond itself, may occur. Without doubt, in the case of adultery, where, 
 by the law itself, marriage both can be and is dissolved, and the innocent 
 party is permitted to enter into another marriage (Matt. 19 : 9; 5 : 32), 
 and in a case of malicious desertion (1 Cor. 7 : 15), where the deserter 
 himself actually and rashly sunders the conjugal bond, and where to the 
 deserted party, when a competent judge makes the declaration, the 
 power belongs to enter into a new marriage." The reason why a divorce 
 may be granted under these two conditions, lies in the very nature of 
 the case. 
 
 Holl. (1381) : " From the nature of marriage, adultery of itself and 
 directly conflicts with unity of the flesh, and, therefore, also with the 
 substance of marriage, through which two become one flesh, Gen. 2 : 
 24. 'For he which is joined to a harlot is one body with the harlot,' 
 1 Cor. 6: 16, and, therefore, is no longer one flesh with his wife." 
 (1382): ""Whatever immediately interferes with conjugal fidelity iself 
 and the usus thori, dissolves the marriage bond, and, therefore, by its 
 own right, opens the doors of a second marriage to the innocent party; 
 but malicious and incorrigible desertion, etc. Therefore, ..." 
 
624 OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 Grh. (XVI, 176) : "Our churches having followed the most clear 
 declaration of our Saviour Christ, recognize no other cause of a divorce 
 that is truly and properly so called but one, viz., adultery. ... In case 
 of malicious desertion, the apostle grants the innocent and deserted 
 party the power to enter into a new marriage, because the injuring and 
 deserting person has, in fact and indiscreetly, made the divorce on its 
 own authority without sufficient and just cause." lb., p. 214. " Since 
 it has been proved, from the words of Christ and the Apostle Paul, that 
 there are only two causes of divorce, viz., adultery and malicious de- 
 sertion, ... it will be manifest, at first sight, to every one, that the 
 remaining causes of divorce, which are mentioned in addition to adul- 
 tery and malicious desertion, are not just, legitimate, and sufficient 
 causes." As such other causes, Grh. enumerates: "unbelief, heresy, 
 a solemn vow of continence, crime, danger of life, sterility, supervening 
 impotency, incurable diseases, madness, relationship to a harlot, flight 
 or banishment because of an offence." He denies the right of divorce 
 in all these cases, excepting only the " danger of life," which he places 
 in the category of malicious desertion; p. 260, "that, if the husband 
 persevere in obstinacy, and distinctly testify that he is unwilling at any 
 time to take her back, or to admit a reconciliation, or to desist from his 
 former habits, it cannot be doubtful that he is to be regarded a malicious 
 deserter, and, therefore, the deserted one can be dealt with otherwise." 
 The Dogmaticians are not, however, altogether agreed in regard to this 
 point. Sarcerius allows divorce in the case of leprosy and incurable 
 disease, and Hemming-: "In case of flight and banishment on account 
 of an offence;" but this he does upon the ground "that every offence 
 that is to be compared with adultery, is determined by Christ as a cause 
 of divorce." (Grh. 266.) In a different way Chmn. justifies divorce 
 "on account of cruelty, poison, and plots laid for the life." He says 
 (Loc. Th., Ill, 210): "Since the text, Matt. 19: 19, makes mention 
 only of adultery, some earnestly contend that divorces cannot occur on 
 account of cruelty and plots laid for the life. But in the code the law 
 of Theodosius . . . grants divorce even in such cases. But, although 
 some reject this law and contend that it disagrees with the Gospel, yet 
 they do not understand aright the distinction between Law and Gospel. 
 And since the Lord says expressly, that in the Mosaic polity divorces 
 were granted because of hardness of heart, he signifies that the mode of 
 governing men who can be cured, who are members of the Church and 
 desire to obey the Gospel, is entirely a different matter from the gov- 
 ernment of the impious and contumacious, who are unwilling to endure 
 the restraints of the Law. . . . In a cruel person, not belonging to the 
 
PARTIAL DIVORCE. 625 
 
 Church, the civil magistrate seems to be able to use the law of Theodo- 
 sius. God wishes civil government to be an honor to the good, and a 
 terror to the evil. . . . Neither are there wanting in governments ob- 
 stinate and unjust persons and those without natural affection, exercis- 
 ing their unjust cruelty over their own families, such as the Lord, in 
 this discourse, calls hard-hearted." 
 
 There are still two points to be considered, in the matter of actual 
 divorce. Br. (836) : " 1. When persons unlawfully united (in degrees 
 of consanguinity prohibited by the law of nature, or where a mistake 
 of person, or impotency of one or the other party has intervened) are 
 separated, this is not properly divorce, but rather a declaration that in 
 the union there was not a conjugal bond (namely, because the one person 
 could not contract it with the other, as for example, with a blood rela- 
 tive ; or, that he had not truly contracted it with her, but with another ; 
 or, that one of the two was utterly incapable of intercourse, and, there- 
 fore, also of the contraction of the marriage union)." 
 
 " 2. In like manner, when husband and wife are separated, only as 
 to bed and board (for example, because of severe enmity, which appears 
 incorrigible, and even joined with danger to the life of one or the 
 other), it is not divorce properly speaking; but a suspension of the acts 
 of cohabitation and conjugal duty (the conjugal bond remaining unim- 
 paired; so that neither husband nor wife can enter into another mar- 
 riage ; yea, sometimes the husband is bound to afford the wife support)." 
 
PART Y. 
 
 OF THE LAST THINGS. 
 
 M 
 
 § 62. Preliminary Statement. 
 
 AN attains his final aim not in this life, but in that which 
 is to come; what lies between the two, and what must take 
 place in order to secure for individual men, and for the entire 
 Church, final completion, that is the subject of this article. [1] 
 It bears the title — of the last things (de novissimis) — because it 
 discusses what is the last, viz., that with which the present world 
 comes to an end. [2] We treat of the separate features in the 
 order in which they will occur, viz.: (1) of death; (2) of the 
 resurrection of the dead; (3) of the final judgment ; (4) of the 
 end of the world; (5) of eternal damnation and eternal life.[S~\ 
 
 § 63. (1.) Of Death. 
 
 "Death (in the strict sense) is the deprivation of natural 
 life, occurring through the separation of soul and body." Br. 
 (354). [4] It is a consequence of the fall of our first parents, 
 hence also all men are subjected to it (Rom. 5: 12.) [5] In death 
 the natural life of man ceases, it is true, as this was conditioned 
 by the peculiar connection between body and soul, [6] but the 
 soul does not cease as the body, but lives on with all the attri- 
 butes and powers that belong to its essential nature. [7] For the 
 immortality of the soul reason has from time immemorial set up 
 an array of proofs, but we become incontrovertibly certain of it 
 through the positive declarations of the Holy Scriptures. [8] 
 From them we learn also this much concerning the condition of 
 the soul after death, that its lot, immediately thereafter, is a 
 happy or unhappy one, just as its possessor in this life embraced 
 
THE END OF MAN AND OF THE WORLD. 627 
 
 salvation through Christ or not. [9] The doctrine of an inter- 
 mediate condition of the soul, in which it is neither happy nor 
 unhappy, as though asleep, is therefore erroneous ; [10] erroneous 
 also the Eoman Catholic view, according to which not two, but 
 five different places are to be assumed, where we are to suppose 
 the souls of the departed to be, viz., hell, purgatory, the abode 
 of infants, the abode of the fathers, and heaven. [11] 
 
 [1] Br. (353) : " Inasmuch as the highest or ultimate blessedness is 
 not in this life, but in the life to come ; and, in like manner, the lowest 
 misery to which it is opposed occurs only after this life ; we must now 
 consider those things which, according to divine revelation, pertain to 
 the end of this life, and to entrance into the life or state to come." 
 
 Quen. (IV, 534): " We have thus far considered the means of salva- 
 tion, properly so-called, both those for bestowing (Sortm), on the part of 
 God, namely, the Word and Sacraments, and that for reception {Itj-rtlkov) 
 on our part, namely, faith ; the means, called so in a less accurate sense, 
 now follow, viz., the four Last Things: death, the resurrection of the 
 dead, the final judgment, and the end of the world, which are not so 
 properly means to obtain salvation, as the way through w T hich we reach 
 the goal or limit. For the passing over of the godly from the Church 
 militant to the Church triumphant, occurs through death, for which 
 reason Gregory of Nyssa compares it to a midwife bringing us to life 
 truly so-called. Following death is the judgment, whose forerunner is 
 the general resurrection of all men, and whose following attendant is the 
 end of the world." 
 
 [2] Br. (353): "They are otherwise called the Last Things (Novis 
 sima), in Greek ra enxara ; because some both are, and are called, last, 
 with respect to men as individuals : and others, with respect to them col- 
 lectively and to the whole world. To the former class belong death and 
 the state of the soul after death. To the latter, the resurrection of the 
 dead and the corresponding change of the living, the final judgment, 
 and the conflagration of the world." 
 
 [3] The later Dogmaticians treat, under this head, only of death, 
 the resurrection of the dead, the final judgment, and the end of the 
 world, because they had previously (immediately after the doctrine of 
 Providence) discussed eternal life, as the formal end of theology, and 
 had appended to that the topic of eternal condemnation, as the opposite 
 of eternal life. We here follow the arrangement of the earlier Dogma- 
 ticians. In regard to the division of the novissima, Grh. (XVII, 8) : 
 " The last things are those either of the macrocosm or of the micro- 
 
628 THE LAST THINGS. 
 
 cosm.* The last things of the microcosm are of a two-fold class. For 
 they are either a way leading to the last limit or the goal terminating 
 the way. The former passes through a two-fold valley, namely, of death, 
 Ps. 23 : 4, and of Jehoshaphat or of judgment, Joel 3 : 12, which judg- 
 ment the general resurrection precedes. There is a goal, attained either 
 by the soul of man when released from the body, or by the entire man 
 after the resurrection. And this goal is of two parts, directly opposite 
 each other, viz., for the wicked, hell, for the godly, life eternal. From all 
 these enumerations, taken together, it becomes clear that there are six 
 last things pertaining in general to man and the wor*ld : (1) The tem- 
 poral death of man, to winch belongs the separation of the soul from the 
 body, and the reduction of the body to ashes in the sepulchre. (2) The 
 general resurrection of all men. (3) The administration of the final 
 judgment. (4) The conflagration of the world. (5) The eternal dam- 
 nation of the wicked. (6) The eternal glorification of the godly. Since 
 it is customary to state only four last things, we can, therefore, proceed 
 in this manner : The last things, taken generically, are twofold, with 
 respect to a twofold object ; (a) of the macrocosm ; (6) of the micro- 
 cosm. The last thing of the macrocosm is the end of the world. The 
 last things of the microcosm are four : (a) death ; (b) resurrection ; (c) 
 judgment; (d) eternal state, viz., of the godly in heaven, and the 
 damned in hell." 
 
 [4] Quen. (IV, 535): " Death properly taken signifies the separa- 
 tion of the soul from the body, and its deprivation of animal life ; to this 
 ordinarily all are subject, the good as well as the wicked, and this is the 
 signification in this article." Id. (ib.): "The names of death are sweet ; 
 it is called a gathering to their own people, Gen. 25 : 8, 17 ; 35 : 29; 
 49: 33 ; Numb. 20 : 24, 26 ; Deut. 32 : 50, a departure in peace, Luke 
 2 : 29, a taking away from the evil to come, Is. 57 : 1, resting on a couch, 
 v. 2, a sleep, Dan. 12:2; Matt. 9 : 24 ; 1 Thess. 4: 13." Grh. 
 (XVII, 15): " The term death is taken, in Holy Scripture and by the 
 Church writers, either, literally or figuratively. Literally, for natural 
 death, which is the separation of soul from body. . . .In this significa- 
 tion, it is received in this article, when death is enumerated among the 
 last things of man. Figuratively, it is used either by way of meta- 
 phor, or of metonymy. Metaphorically, for temporal or eternal death. 
 Temporal death, metaphorically so termed, is likewise twofold, either 
 bodily or spiritual. Bodily death, metaphorically so termed, embraces 
 calamities of every class endured by man in this life because of sin, 
 
 * [" Macrocosm, the universe, or the visible system of worlds ; opposed to micro- 
 cosm, or the little world, constituted by man." — Webster.] 
 
DEATH TEMPORAL, SPIRITUAL, ETERNAL. 629 
 
 which are the heralds and messengers of death, Ex. 10 : 17. . . . Spir- 
 itual death is twofold, that of believers and of unbelievers ; the former is 
 glorious and profitable, the latter detestable and destructive. The spir- 
 itual death of believers is that by which, to their welfare, they are said 
 to die (1) to sin, Rom. 6:2;. . . (2) to the law, Rom. 7:4;. . . 
 (3) to the ceremonies of the law, Rom. 7 : 4, 6 ; Gal. 2 : 19 ; (4) to the 
 world, Gal. 6:14.. . . The spiritual death of unbelievers is that by 
 which they are said to have died and to have been separated from the 
 true life of the soul, which is in God, Matt. 8 : 22; Luke 9: 60. . . . 
 The eternal death of the damned is the final and entire loss of divine fel- 
 lowship, and the horrible torture of soul and body resulting therefrom, 
 and the never ending misery dreaded by the damned in hell, which is 
 called by John the second death, Rev. 2: 11; 20; 14, in referring to 
 both the natural and the spiritual death peculiar to unbelievers." 
 
 [5] Grh. (XVII, 30) : "From the divine Word it is evident that 
 there are three principal and primary causes, on account of which man 
 is subject to death. The first is the malice of the devil leading him 
 astray. The second is the guilt of man in sinning. The third is the 
 wrath of God, as an avenger. These causes follow each other in a cer- 
 tain order." 
 
 Hfrffr. (650): " If man had remained in the nobility of the integ- 
 rity in which he was first created, when the period of his earthly life 
 had been completed he would have been transferred to the eternal and 
 heavenly happiness, without death, whose precursors are evils and 
 calamities of every kind. But because he transgressed God's command, 
 through sin death entered into the world, to which all men stained by 
 sin remain subject. And although, through Christ, our restorer, we 
 have been regained for life eternal, yet this is the way of all flesh ; and 
 while we, who believe, pass, it is true, through death to life, the wicked 
 are cast, by bodily death, into death and damnation eternal." 
 
 The Dogmaticians further distinguish the physical or proximate causes 
 from the principal (in other words, remote or moral). Holl. (1225): 
 " Of the physical causes of death, some are natural, others preternatural, 
 and others violent. The natural cause is the consumption of radical 
 moisture and the extinction of native warmth. Preternatural causes are 
 the severer diseases. Violent causes are outward objects bringing such 
 violence to the body that the bond of natural uniou, by which body and 
 soul are joined, is broken." 
 
 [6] Holl. (1225): "The death of the body formally consists in the 
 deprivation of natural life." Grh. (XVII, 51): " Scripture describes 
 the form of death: Ecc. 12 : 7 ; 2 Cor. 5 : 1, 4, 8; Phil. 1 : 23; 2 Tim. 
 
630 THE LAST THINGS. 
 
 4: 6 ; 2 Pet. 1 : 14. For, since man consists of soul and body, united 
 to each other by an essential bond, the death of man is nothing else than 
 the avalvoig, or release of the soul from the body. Since, as long as man 
 lives, the soul sojourns in the body, just as in an earthly dwelling-place, 
 man's death is nothing else than the mTalvat^ (dissolution, 2 Cor. 5 : 1) 
 and cnrodeGic (putting off, 2 Pet. 1 : 14) of this earthly dwelling-place 
 and tabernacle, and the k-Kavax^priaiq (return) of the soul to God from its 
 long pilgrimage. Since the body is, as it were, the covering and gar- 
 ment of the soul, man's death is nothing else than the eadvaig- or the 
 taking off of this garment. Since life is an act of the soul in the body, 
 to tfv eon Gvvdecig ml avvdea/iog tyvxvr o&fiaTi" (life is the composition and 
 bond of the soul with the body. Aristotle's Metaphysics, Book VIII). 
 
 [7] Br. (363): "When the dissolution of the soul and body has oc- 
 curred, and death therefore happens, the soul nevertheless survives and 
 performs its operations separately, outside of the body.* For example, 
 in those things which pertain formally to the intellect and will, as essen- 
 tial powers of the soul, as it is human or rational, which themselves also 
 survive and are not inactive; but that the intellect indeed retains the 
 intelligible forms which it had in the body, and therefore can also call 
 forth acts of knowledge ; to which, then, it is correctly believed that 
 some acts of the will, with respect to objects presented by the intellect, 
 correspond. And to this is generally referred the statement of Rev. 6 : 
 10, that the knowledge of a former condition and a certain longing are 
 ascribed to the souls of the martyrs. But we do not say that the souls 
 of the deceased know distinctly and definitely the actions and affairs of 
 each of the living, which have occurred since the departure of the former 
 from the body, and especially the various prayers and rites of worship 
 directed to them." 
 
 Grh. (XVII, 149) : " In life, they (body and soul) are connected to 
 each other by the closest bond, whence the affections and sufferings of 
 the body flow over into the soul, and in turn the affections and suffer- 
 ings of the soul flow over into the body ; the soul does nothing whatever 
 outside of the body, nor does the body do anything independently of the 
 soul ; but in death the soul is separated from the body, and returns to 
 God, in whose judgment it is placed, from which it is either borne by 
 holy angels into heaven, or is delivered to evil spirits to be cast into 
 hell ; the body is turned back again into the dust of the earth, from 
 which its first and earliest origin proceeded, and by putrefaction and in- 
 cineration is reduced to its primitive elements. After this dissolution 
 and separation, the affections and sufferings of the soul no longer flow 
 over to the body ; and, in turn, the affections and sufferings of the body 
 
THE IMMORTALITY OF THE SOUL. 631 
 
 no longer flow over into the soul, nor does the soul act through the body 
 as an instrument, but lives and subsists apart from it ; neither is it dis- 
 solved nor does it fall apart as the body that is resolved into its own 
 elements, but, subsisting outside of the body, it spends an immortal life, 
 and, removed from all intercourse with the body, is preserved some- 
 where (ttov) until, on the appointed day of the general resurrection, the 
 body raised up by divine power will be joined again to the same, and 
 man will afterwards experience the righteous sentence of the judge." 
 
 [8] Quex. (IV, 537) : " That human souls are immortal, and that 
 they do not perish with the bodies, can be clearly and firmly established 
 from the Holy Scriptures alone." Grh. (XVII, 150) produces the 
 scriptural proof: " (1) From the distinct assertion of our Saviour, 
 Matt. 10 : 28. (2) From the opposition of soul and body. That in 
 which soul and body are opposed to each other antithetically cannot in 
 like manner be predicated of both. But in mortality, soul and body 
 are opposed to each other in such a manner that mortality is affirmed of 
 the body, but denied concerning the soul. Therefore mortality cannot 
 be predicated of both in like manner, cf. Ecc. 12:7. (3) From the 
 original creation of the soul. The souls of brutes were produced from 
 the same material as their bodies, whence, when their bodies perish, the 
 souls themselves likewise perish, Gen. 1 : 20. But into man he breathed 
 a soul, Gen. 2 : 7, whence Ave thus infer : 'A soul whose origin is dif- 
 ferent from that of the souls of brutes, does not have the same end with 
 the souls of brutes. But now the primeval origin of the human soul is 
 different from that of the souls of brutes, because it was made not of an 
 elementary material, as the souls of brutes, but divinely breathed into 
 the body formed from the earth. Therefore, to the body there is as- 
 cribed TrXaatg (the being moulded) from the dust of the earth, but to the 
 soul the immediate e/unvsvaig (inspiration) of God. (4) From the name 
 itself. . . . The human soul is called spirit, Ecc. 3 : 21 ; Acts 7 : 59 ; 
 Heb. 12 : 23. (5) From the continuation of life after man's death, 
 Matt. 22 : 32 ; Mark 12 : 26 ; Luke 20 : 37 ; Hab. 1 : 12. (6) From 
 the description of death, Gen. 25 : 8 ; 35 : 29 ; 49 : 33 ; Dan. 12:13; 
 Acts 26 : 18 ; Col. 1 : 12, etc." 
 
 But concerning the immortality of the soul, Grh. still adds (XVII, 
 150) : "Add the fact that the soul is not immortal in the same manner 
 as God, viz., essentially (bvcncodug) and independently, for in that sense 
 God alone is said to have immortality, 1 Tim. 6:16, but through the 
 grace of creation, because it was so fashioned by God as not to have in 
 itself an inner principle of corruption, but to be incorporeal, invisible, 
 and immortal. Yet God could, if he wished, reduce the soul to noth- 
 
632 THE LAST THINGS. 
 
 ing, and altogether extinguish it; but because he wished it to be im- 
 mortal, it continues through and because of the will of the immortal 
 Creator. That is immortal which either can be destroyed by absolutely 
 no power, not even by divine power (and in this manner God alone is 
 immortal), or which has been so framed by God as not to perish, al- 
 though by God's absolute power it could be destroyed ; in the latter 
 manner the souls of men and the angels are immortal." Concerning 
 the force of the evidence in " the arguments sought from the light of 
 nature," Grh. (XYII, 159) : " We make a distinction between ante- 
 cedent and subsequent modes of reasoning. Thomas : 'A mode of reason- 
 ing is employed with regard to any subject in a twofold manner ; in the 
 first place, to give sufficient proof to a statement ; in the second place, 
 when the statement has already been established, to show that the effects 
 that follow correspond.' In this latter manner, the immortality of the 
 soul can be proved from the light of nature, after it has been shown 
 from Holy Scripture that the same consequence has been fully estab- 
 lished. Again, we make a distinction between conclusive and probable 
 modes of reasoning. The arguments produced from the light of nature 
 can induce a persuasion of probability concerning the immortality of the 
 soul, but can in no way present a firm, immovable, and irrefragable 
 foundation of faith." Grh. (XVII, 147) produces as such proofs: 
 " (1) A rational soul is a substance subsisting of itself and spiritual, as 
 is manifest from its operation, because there are in us some spiritual acts 
 of knowledge, i. e., neither consisting of matter, nor depending upon 
 matter or a subject, but inorganic in the cognizing of immaterial, univer- 
 sal, and eternal things ; therefore it is also immortal. (2) The human 
 soul is in essence simple, invisible, immaterial, most like unto God, and 
 independent of matter. (3) It is an essence primarily self-moving. 
 (4) By a natural longing it desires eternal things, and it is not probable 
 that this desire would be born within it for no purpose. (5) It contem- 
 plates eternal essences, while, nevertheless, nothing can rise to the con- 
 templation of that from which it entirely differs in essence. (6) In 
 abstraction from objects of sense it is more and more perfected, and 
 therefore, when it will be separated from the body, will become most 
 perfect. (7) It has not originated from elements, because it has knowl- 
 edge naturally implanted, which no elementary material can acquire. (8) 
 It has the distinction between the Honorable and the Base implanted} 
 from which it derives this rule of justice, viz., that it ought to be w r ell 
 with the good, and ill with the wicked. But now, in this life, more 
 frequently neither the good receive their rewards, nor the wicked their 
 merited punishments ; therefore another life remains to which the im- 
 
ARGUMENTS FOR IMMORTALITY. 633 
 
 mortal soul aspires, otherwise this distinction would have been implanted 
 in the mind in vain. (9) To men self-conscious of evil because of 
 crimes, it occasions fear ; therefore it is naturally anxious concerning 
 the condition that will follow death, and is certainly self-conscious of its 
 immortality ; for if the soul would not survive after death, men self- 
 conscious of evil would have no reason to dread future punishments. 
 (10) The state of ecstasy, i.e., when, without any employment of the 
 senses, it naturally undergoes an intense application ef its rational por- 
 tion to sublime affairs, and therefore can also naturally subsist of itself, 
 because just as in working everything is not of itself dependent upon 
 another, so also in existing. (11) Finally, they urge the agreement of 
 the sounder philosophers, who prove that the immortality of the soul 
 belongs to the number of those things which are -n-pohtyeig (presupposi- 
 tions), or certain preconceived notions admitted by all." 
 
 [A modern classification of the various arguments that have been 
 used, is as follows : 
 
 I. Theoretical (speculative) Arguments : 
 
 1. Metaphysical Proof. Since the soul is immaterial and simple, it 
 is also indissoluble (Plato, Cicero, Mos. Mendelssohn, the Herbartians, 
 and the new school of Leibnitz). 
 
 2. Teleological Proof. The rich capacities of the human spirit can- 
 not be satisfactorily developed in this earthly life ; its destiny, therefore, 
 must extend to a future life (Cicero, Leibnitz, Eiemarius, Lotze). 
 
 3. Proof from Cosmical Plurality. As the heavenly bodies stand in 
 communion with one another, so also their inhabitants must have a 
 moral communion. But this can be realized only in a future world. 
 (Wilkins, Fontenelle, Huyghens, Derham, Kant, Bonnet, Herder, Jean 
 Paul, J. P. Lange, Chalmers, etc.). 
 
 4. Analogical Proof. From succession of germ, plant and fruit in 
 vegetable life (Cf. John 12 : 24; 1 Cor. 15 : 36 sqq.) ; from the meta- 
 morphosis of the Phoenix (Clement of Rome, Theophilus, Irenseus,, 
 Tertullian), of the butterfly (Basil the Great, Swammerdam, Bossuet, 
 Paley), or from the law of the conservation of force (Teichmiiller, 
 Lilienfeld, Schlesinger, etc.). 
 
 5. Moral Proof: 
 
 a. Arg. Ethonomicum. Man strives after virtue, as well as after 
 happiness. But this life affords no satisfaction (Kant, Sintenis, Schaar- 
 schmidt). 
 
 b. Arg. Juridicum. It is only the promise of a life beyond death 
 that can inspire one with love for his country (J. G. Fichte). 
 
 II. Historical Arguments : 
 41 
 
634 THE LAST THINGS. 
 
 1. Empirical attempts at proof. The exhibitions and arts of the older 
 necromantic superstition ; the visions of Swedenborg ; the experiments 
 of Spiritism. 
 
 2. Traditional Proofs : 
 
 a. Arg. e consensu gentium (already in Homer, Virgil, Cicero). 
 
 b. The proof from New Testament history, from the testimony of 
 Jesus to his resurrection (especially John 14: 2 sqq. ; 11 : 25), and the 
 miracles of himself and his apostles in raising the dead. 
 
 Proper demonstrative force pertains to these arguments only so far as 
 they are sustained by religious faith ; and even where this presumption 
 occurs, the various speculative attempts at proof have only uncertain 
 value. Complete firmness of conviction concerning personal progress in 
 a blessed hereafter is afforded only by surrender to the Redeemer in lov- 
 ing obedience of faith, viz., the last of the above mentioned arguments 
 appropriated in the life." (Zockler's Handbook, Dogmatik).~] 
 
 [9] Hutt. (Loc. Th., 297): " The souls of the godly, or of believers 
 in Christ, are in the hand of God, awaiting there the glorious resurrec- 
 tion of the body, and the full enjoyment of eternal blessedness, Wis. 3 : 
 1 ; Luke 16 : 22, 23." Br. (364): " Yea, we believe that the souls of 
 the godly attain essential blessedness immediately after they have been 
 separated from the body (Phil. 1 : 23 ; Luke 23 : 43 ; John 5 : 24 ; Rev. 
 7 : 4, 15), but that the souls of the wicked undergo their own damnation 
 (1 Pet. 3 : 19)." Grh. (XVII, 178): " Of receptacles and habitations. 
 Scripture, by a general appellation, calls it a place, John 14: 2 ; Luke 
 16 : 28; Acts 1 : 25. Not that it is a corporeal and physical place, prop- 
 erly so called, but because it is "a where" (jrov^ into which souls sepa- 
 rated from the body are brought together. Scripture enumerates only 
 two such receptacles, habitations, guard-houses, and promptuaries,' one 
 of which, prepared for the souls of the godly, is called by the most or- 
 dinary appellation heaven, and the other, intended for the souls of the 
 wicked, is called hell." 
 
 [10] Quen. (IV, 538): "The souls of men, separated from the 
 body, do not sleep, neither are they insensible." 
 
 [The chief arguments of the Psychopannichists are stated and re- 
 futed by Grh., XVIII, 26 sqq. : 
 
 1. < The dead are said to sleep, Matt. 9 : 24; John 11 : 11 ; Acts 7: 
 60; 1 Cor. 15: 18; 1 Thess. 4: 13.' Answer: As sleep holds only the 
 members and outward senses, while the soul exercises its inner opera- 
 tions, as is inferred from dreams ; so in death, the body alone perishes, 
 while the soul of the godly is transferred to Abraham's bosom, Luke 
 16 : 22, and enjoys consolation, v. 25 (XVII, 20). 
 
PSYCHOPANNICHISM REFUTED. 635 
 
 2. ' In the Psalms, it is often said : The dead shall not praise Thee, 
 etc., Ps. 6:5; 115 : 17.' Answer: These passages refer to the procla- 
 mation and propagation of true doctrine, and the celebration of divine 
 blessings through which, in this life, others may be invited to true con- 
 version and the glorification of the divine name. 
 
 3. ' The Lord of the vineyard gives his laborers hire at evening 
 time, Matt. 20 : 8. But by evening, is meant the time of resurrection 
 and judgment.' Answer: Parables do not apply in every part, but only 
 the principal scope must be regarded, and that by evening, not only the 
 time of universal, but of that particular judgment which occurs at 
 death, is indicated. 
 
 4. ' Heb. 4:3: We which have believed, do enter into rest.' An- 
 swer : The rest of souls must be understood with respect to the terminus 
 a quo, i. e., they rest from labors and troubles, to which the godly are 
 subjected in this life, as is explained in Rev. 14: 13, but not with re- 
 spect to the terminus ad quern, as though the souls of the godly rest after 
 death in the stupor of sleep ; for, in this respect, it is said of the angels 
 and the blessed in Heaven, that they rest not day nor night, but inces- 
 santly praise God, Rev. 4: 8. God is said, Gen. 2: 2, to rest, and yet : 
 1 He that keepeth Israel, shall neither slumber nor sleep,' Ps. 121 : 4. 
 The souls of the martyrs are commanded to rest, Rev. 6:11, and yet 
 they cry with a loud voice, v. 10. Their rest, therefore, is a patient 
 expectation of final liberation and union with the bodies which are to 
 be raised, Is. 26: 20; Dan. 12: 12." 
 
 On the knowledge of the dead : " It is a pious and good thought to 
 hold that they have a general knowledge of what is occurring to the 
 Church militant here on earth, and therefore they beseech Christ, with 
 whom they are present in heavenly glory, for some good for the Church, 
 especially since they are members of the same mystical body, of which 
 Christ is the Head. Meanwhile it must not be inferred from this, that 
 they have in full view the individual circumstances and calamities of the 
 godly."] 
 
 Quen. (IV, 538): "Neither, after death, do the souls of the godly 
 live in a cool and tranquil place, and possess only a foretaste of heavenly 
 happiness, but they enjoy full and essential happiness. Neither after 
 death do the souls of the wicked feel only the beginning of tortures, but 
 perfect and complete damnation." 
 
 [Nevertheless this must be qualified by his statement (I, 564): " The 
 oeginning of infernal torments, with respect to the soul separated from the 
 body, is the first moment of its departure from the body. The torture 
 of the entire composite being will follow, when sentence of final judg- 
 
636 THE LAST THINGS. 
 
 ment is given." (560): " The beginning of the plenary perception of 
 ineffable blessings and joys, is, with inspect to the soul, the end of this 
 life. But the fullest perception will occur after the reunion of body and 
 soul." 
 
 Geh. (XVIII, 21): "The pains of hell, which the condemned expe- 
 rience immediately after death, are graphically described, in Luke 16 : 
 23 seq. : 1. They are in hell, 'evT&adr/. This expresses every kind of 
 torture ; since in hell there is the presence of all evil, and the absence 
 of all good. 2. They are 'ev fiao&voig, i. e., they feel such pains as 
 criminals experience, who are subject to most exquisite tortures. 3. 
 bdw&vTcu, they feel the anguish belonging to those who endure the pains 
 of child-birth, under which figure Scripture expresses the most severe 
 tortures. For they are burned 'ev rrj tfkoyi, not lightly and superficially, 
 but in the midst of flames penetrating ad medullas. 5. They can obtain 
 not even a drop of water to cool their body, much less the least consola- 
 tion for their soul. 6. They see the elect in glory, and, hence, from 
 envy, are seized with horror and indignation. 7. Their sorrow is in- 
 creased by the remembrance of former good. 8. They know that their 
 punishment will be eternal, viz., that there is a gulf fixed between them 
 and the godly, viz., God's immutable decision that none of the godly can 
 relapse to the state of the damned, and, on the other hand, that none of 
 the damned can be drawn to the state of the blessed. 9. They will be 
 tortured by the pains of their kindred ; for when the rich man wants his 
 brethren to be warned, he does this, not from love and desire for their 
 salvation, but from fear and terror, lest his pains may be increased by 
 the sight of those prepared for them. 10. They resist and contend 
 against God. ' Nay, father Abraham,' says the rich man. Here is the 
 ' gnashing of teeth,' Matt. 13 : 50, whereby, from impatience, indignation 
 and constant despair they contend against God. Although the souls of 
 the godless do not immediately after their egress from the body receive 
 these punishments in full measure, yet they will be subjected to them in 
 every part, when, on the day of judgment, they will be reunited to their 
 bodies; nevertheless, it is clearly seen, from the text, that the beginning 
 of these tortures is experienced immediately after death."] 
 
 (lb., 540.) Metempsychosis is entirely rejected. Grh. (XVII, 171): 
 " Before all things, the absurd and senseless opinion must be removed, 
 that states that ' souls migrate from bodies worn out by disease and 
 death, and insinuate themselves into those that are new and recently 
 born ; and that the same souls are always being reborn, sometimes in a 
 man, sometimes in a domestic animal, sometimes in a wild beast, some- 
 times in a bird, and in this manner are immortal, because they are fre- 
 
THE FIGMENT OF PURGATORY. 637 
 
 quently exchanging habitations of various and dissimilar bodies, in 
 which words Lactantius describes the transmigration and transanimation 
 of souls, called by the Greeks fierefj.-ipvxci<Ti<r «*" /LteTevcofiaToxyig." 
 
 [11] Grh. (XVII, 183): " The Papists fabricate five receptacles ot 
 souls: (1) Hell, to which they consign the souls of extremely wicked 
 men, who depart from this life in unbelief, hardness of heart, and the 
 more serious offences against conscience, or mortal sins. (2) Purgatory, 
 next to hell, to which they consign the souls of those who have not yet 
 been fully purged of venial sins, and have not given full satisfaction for 
 the temporal punishments of sins, but who, nevertheless, have departed 
 from this life in the faith of Christ ; these, they state, must labor in 
 purgatory until, with their stains purged away, they soar pure and 
 cleansed into heaven. (3) The limbus puer or um^ to which they consign 
 the souls of unbaptized infants; who, because of original sin, in which 
 they have departed without the remedy of Baptism, suffer in this subter- 
 ranean prison the punishment of loss, although not with respect of sense, 
 having been excluded from the joys of heaven, and yet not subjected to 
 the pains of hell. It is called a limbus, because it is, as it were, the 
 border and extremity of hell, just as the edge (limbus) of a garment. 
 (4) The limbus patrum, into which they introduce the souls of the patri- 
 archs, and of all the saints of the Old Testament who died before the 
 descent of Christ ad inferos, which, they assert, bore, in this apartment, 
 the temporal punishment of loss, until, by the payment of the debt of 
 original sin, through the death of Christ, they were delivered from this 
 and introduced to the fruition of heavenly blessedness, when Christ de- 
 scended ad inferos. (5) Heaven, into which they admit the souls of the 
 saints altogether purged of all sins. The order of these stories, according 
 to the Papists, is such as this: Hell is placed in the very centre of the 
 earth; next this, purgatory, which is, as it were, a second story; bor- 
 dering upon this is the limbus infantum, to which the limbus patrum im- 
 mediately succeeds, which at the present time is altogether empty, be- 
 cause of Christ's translation of the fathers to heaven." The doctrine 
 of purgatory was rejected especially by the Lutheran Church as con- 
 flicting with that of reconciliation by faith alone. Hfrrfr. (667): 
 "Everything that is ascribed to the satisfactions either of purgatory or 
 of the intercession of the saints, is detracted from the merit of Christ, 
 which alone cleanses us from sins." 
 
 [Grh., XVII, 189 sqq., rejects the limbus puer or um: " 1. It is based 
 upon the false hypothesis of the absolute necessity of Baptism. 2. In- 
 fants departing without Baptism, either believe or do not believe. If 
 the former, they are in the grace of God, and obtain the remission of 
 
638 THE LAST THINGS. 
 
 their sins ; if the latter, they remain children of wrath, under condem- 
 nation, exiles from the heavenly Jerusalem, and are cast into the lake 
 of fire. There is no tertium aliquod between faith and unbelief, the 
 state of grace and of wrath, the kingdom of God and the devil, so also 
 there is none between life eternal and the eternal fire. Matt. 25 : 46 ; 
 Mark 16:16; John 3 : 18, 36 ; Rev. 20 ? 15 ; 21 : 27. 3. If the infante 
 of Christians departing without Baptism would be cast into a peculiar 
 limbus bordering upon the infernal fire, how would it be consistent with 
 the promise of Gen. 17 : 7? 4. Not even in the Old Testament were 
 infants of Israel, departing before circumcision, absolutely excluded from 
 the kingdom of God. 5. If infants would depart without the forgive- 
 ness of original sin, they would be subject not only to the punishment 
 of loss, but also to the punishment of sense, not only excluded from the 
 kingdom of God, but also tortured by the infernal fire of eternal dam- 
 nation. For the wages of sin is death and eternal damnation ; not only 
 the punishment of loss, but also of sense. 6. If infants neither rejoice 
 nor grieve, nor know or feel aught, they undoubtedly cannot be said to 
 sustain the punishment of loss, since being ignorant, insensible and 
 sleeping, they cannot be said to be punished." 
 
 Against the limbus patrum, he urges : " 1. Scripture mentions no 
 such limbus, separated from Heaven, in which the souls of the patri- 
 archs were enclosed, until the death of our first parent* was paid by 
 Christ's death. 2. On the other hand, Scripture enumerates only two 
 receptacles after this life, as well in the Old as in the New Testament, 
 viz., Heaven and Hell. 3. Of the souls of the godly in the Old Testa- 
 ment, it is said, 1 Sam. 25 : 25, and of the soul of Lazarus before 
 Christ's passion and death, that it was carried by the angels who always 
 see God's face, Matt. 18: 11, into Abraham's bosom, Luke 16: 22. Of 
 the soul of the converted robber, it is said that it was taken into Para- 
 dise. Unless then we wish to confuse Paradise with hell, we cannot 
 affirm of the Old Testament saints, that they descended into any in- 
 fernal limbus. 4. Although the Epistle to the Hebrews testifies that the 
 patriarchs of the Old Testament had not yet received the completion of 
 the promises concerning the possession of the land of Canaan (Ex. 11 : 
 13, 39), yet that their souls were not for this reason excluded from the 
 kingdom of Heaven, v. 10, 16. 5. The examples of godly patriarchs 
 and prophets of the Old Testament. Enoch, Gen. 5 : 24 ; Heb. 11:5; 
 Abraham, John 8 : 5Q ; 3 : 36 ; Rom. 4: 11 ; Luke 16 : 22; Elias, 2 
 Kings 2: 11; Moses and Elias, Matt. 17 : 5 ; Luke 9 : 31. . . .7. 
 It is based on the false opinion, that, before Christ's death, the gate of 
 Paradise was not open to the godly. . . . 9. It detracts from the 
 
NO PURGATORY. 639 
 
 merits of Christ, as though their efficacy did not abound to the fathers 
 of the Old Testament, while yet he is said to be the Lamb of God, slain 
 from the foundation of the world, Rev. 13:8, not only with respect to 
 decree, promise and types in sacrifices, but also with respect to fruit and 
 efficacy, Jesus Christ being ' the same yesterday, to-day, and forever,' 
 Heb. 13 : 8." 
 
 Against purgatory : " 1. It is without scriptural foundation. 
 
 2. It directly contradicts Scripture : (a) Scripture divides all men 
 into only two classes, believers and unbelievers, good and evil, sheep 
 and goats ; heaven being assigned to the one class, hell to the other, (b) 
 It teaches that only in this life is the time to labor, to run, to strive, i. e., 
 to repent, believe, attain the grace of God, the forgiveness of sins and 
 eternal life, but that after death there is no time for repentance and 
 faith, Ecc. 9 : 4, 5, 10 ; 11:3; 12:5; Matt. 25 : 10 ; John 9 : 10 ; 1 
 Cor. 7 : 29 ; 9 : 24 ; Eph. 5:16; Gal. 6 : 8, 10 ; 2 Tim. 4:7; Heb. 
 12:1; Rev. 2:5; Is. 55 : 6. (c) It teaches only two purgations of 
 sins: one external and Levitical for the cleansing of the flesh; the other, 
 internal and spiritual, for the cleansing of the heart. The former is as- 
 signed to Levitical ceremonies, Lev. 12 : 8 ; 13 : 6; 14: 9; the latter 
 to Christ as the efficient cause, Is. 43 : 25 ; John 13 : 8 ; Heb. 1 : 3 ; to 
 the blood of Christ, as the meritorious cause, Heb. 9: 13, 14; 1 John 
 1:7; Rev. 1 : 5, 7, 14; to the word of the Gospel and Baptism, as the 
 instrumental cause on GooVs part, Mai. 3:3; John 15:3; Eph. 5 : 26; 
 Tit. 3:5; and finally to faith, as the instrumental cause on our part, 
 Rev. 15 : 9 ; 1 Cor. 6: 11. But there is no mention of any purgation 
 to be expected after this life, (d) The precepts, promises and examples 
 of the blessed death presented in Scripture not only give no dread of 
 future torments to believers in Christ, but also offer matter for hope, 
 confidence, and exaltation, Job 19 : 25 ; Ps. 31 : 5 ; 27 : 13 ; 116 : 7, 
 9 ; Luke 2 : 29 ; Acts 7 : 59 ; 2 Cor. 5 : 1, 2, 8 ; Phil. 1 : 23; 1 Thess. 
 4: 13; 2 Tim. 1 : 12; 4: 6, 7; 1 Pet. 4: 19; Rev. 2: 10. Especially, the 
 example of the converted robber, Luke 23 : 43. For if any one needed 
 purgation after death before entrance into Paradise, the robber seemed 
 especially to need it ; and yet Christ introduces him immediately into 
 Paradise, (e) All believers in Christ immediately after death are happy 
 and blessed, their souls without any interval or delay being transferred 
 to Paradise, Gen. 5 : 21 ; -Heb. 11 : 5 ; 2 Kings 2:11; Luke 16 : 22 ; 
 Ps. 31 : 5 ; Acts 1 : 58, etc.; John 5 : 24 ; Rev. 14 : 13. (/) Scripture 
 knows but two receptacles, and is ignorant of a third, 1 Sam. 25 : 29 ; 
 Matt. 3: 12; 7: 13 ; 25: 46; Mark 16: 16; Luke 16 : 22 ; John 3: 
 36. (g) Scripture restricts the attaining of forgiveness of sins, the 
 
640 THE LAST THINGS. 
 
 grace of God and salvation, to this life, Ps. 39 : 13 ; 95 : 7 ; Matt. 9 : 
 6; 16: 19; 18: 18; 2 Cor. 6 : 2. Pertinent to this topic, are the pas- 
 sages which testify that the good done in this life, is brought into judg- 
 ment, but not those things which either we ourselves, or others for us, 
 have suffered in purgatory, Matt. 25 : 35 ; 1 Cor. 3 : 8 ; 2 Cor. 5 : 10 ; 
 Gal. 6:5; Rev. 14: 13. And that Scripture circumscribes temporal 
 punishments only by the limit of this life, and those which are required 
 after death it teaches will be eternal, 2 Cor. 4 : 18 ; Rev. 10 : 7 ; from 
 which we infer that if there were a purgatory after this life, it would be 
 temporal, not eternal. (^) It denies that after this life, the dead can 
 be aided by the voice of the living, Ps. 49 : 8, 9, 10 ; Eccl. 9 : 5, 6. 
 
 3. It is contrary to the analogy of faith : (a) The article concerning 
 the mercy of God. For this is described in Scripture, as earnest, sin- 
 cere and perfect. That, however, for which a satisfaction is still de- 
 manded, or punishment still inflicted, is not perfectly forgiven, (b) 
 The article concerning the justice of God. For this does not allow 
 guilt already forgiven to be punished, (c) The article concerning the 
 merits of Christ. If we still had to make satisfaction for our sins, the 
 satisfaction of Christ would be insufficient. If we could make satisfac- 
 tion for the penalties of our sins, a part of Christ's redemption would 
 be transferred to us. (d) The article concerning the Gospel, which is 
 a joyful message concerning the gratuitous and full forgiveness of sins 
 because of Christ. It is the peculiar doctrine of the Gospel to offer 
 to believers the forgiveness of sins, and not a commutation of eternal 
 into temporary punishment. (<?) The article concerning the saving 
 fruit of repentance ; its fruit being the forgiveness of sins, Ps. 32 : 5 ; 
 Jer. 36 : 3 ; Mark 1:4; Luke 24 : 47 ; Acts 3 : 19 ; 5 : 31, and where 
 there is forgiveness of sins, there is no longer need of punishment for 
 sins. The Holy Spirit not only before the reception of Baptism and in 
 Baptism, but even after Baptism, leads those who have fallen into sin to 
 the only satisfaction of Christ offered for us on the altar of the cross, but 
 never presents such a difference as to say that in Baptism the remission 
 of sins is purely gratuitous and perfect, but that, for those which have 
 been committed since Baptism, it requires satisfaction from the sinners 
 themselves, or commutes their eternal and temporal punishments. Let 
 a single passage of Scripture be quoted, in which such difference is 
 stated, (f) The article concerning justification. For sins are forgiven 
 so as to be no longer remembered, Ps. 25 : 7 ; Jer. 3 : 34; Ez. 18 : 22, 
 etc. (g) The article concerning the state of the justified, Rom. 5 : 1, 2; 
 1 Cor. 1: 30; Rom. 8: 1, 24, 33, 34, 38; John 3: 36; Rom. 12: 12; 
 Heb. 4:16; Luke 1 : 74; 2: 29; 2 Cor. 5: 8. (h) The article concern- 
 
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 641 
 
 ing the final judgment. If at the final judgment, there will be no longer 
 a purgatorial fire, there can be none now ; for the grounds of justifica- 
 tion and salvation, viz., the mercy of God, the merit of Christ, the word 
 of the Gospel and true faith in Christ, are of the same and equal virtue 
 before as in the judgment itself; and if it do not conflict with divine jus- 
 tice, that they whom the last day finds alive be transferred into Para- 
 dise, without the intervention of purgatorial fire, undoubtedly it will not 
 conflict with the same that they who die in the Lord before the judg- 
 ment, go into Heaven free from the flames of purgatory. 
 
 4. It contradicts even the hypotheses of the Papists. 
 
 5. It is without support from the Church nearest the Apostles. 
 
 6. It is based upon many false assumptions : (a) That some sins are 
 by their own nature venial, (b) That for venial sins, man himself 
 must make satisfaction ; if not in this life, after this life, (c) That 
 even when the guilt is remitted, the debt of punishment remains to be 
 discharged, (d) That the application of Christ's merit for removing 
 temporal punishment occurs through- works of satisfaction, (e) The 
 sins are remitted in a different way in Baptism, from that in which 
 they are remitted in true repentance, (f) That man is his own re- 
 deemer and saviour, (g) That submission to the penalty inflicted by 
 God, when it proceeds from love, is a virtual repentance, and avails for 
 the remission of sins, (h) That souls in purgatory are neither on the 
 way, nor at the goal."] 
 
 § 64. (2.) Of the Resurrection of the Dead. 
 
 The separation of body and soul, which is occasioned by death, 
 is not one of permanent continuance, but the time will come, as 
 we are most positively assured in the Word of God, in which 
 God will awaken the body and reunite it with the soul that be- 
 longed to it before death. [1] This will be, in substance, the 
 same body with which the soul was united in this life, but en- 
 dowed with new attributes, adapted to the nature of the circum- 
 stances then existing. [2] But, just as the condition of souls after 
 death is different, according as they were godless or godly in this 
 life, so will also the bodies of those who are raised receive dif- 
 ferent attributes, according as a happy or a miserable life is their 
 portion. [3] 
 
 [1] Br. (367): "Just as the soul of man survives after death, so 
 also the body which has been destroyed by death will rise again and be 
 
642 THE LAST THINGS. 
 
 restored to life, as is most clear from the Scriptures (Job 19: 26; Is. 
 26: 19; Dan. 12: 2; John 5: 28; 11: 23; 1 Cor. 15: 12; 1 Tbess. 
 4: 16); but this certainly cannot be discovered from natural reason, 
 although not opposed to it. Namely, when Scripture reveals the doc- 
 trine of the resurrection of the dead, then reason, which recognizes God 
 as the avenger of crimes, and rewarder of the good, discovers that it is 
 rather harmonious with itself than opposed to it, that the bodies, the in- 
 struments of good and evil deeds, should be raised for participation in 
 punishments or rewards. And, although reason does not discover, how 
 bodies the same in number, as were resolved into ashes, can be raised 
 again; yet, "so far from showing its impossibility by an invincible argu- 
 ment, it is compelled rather to leave this to divine power." 
 
 Holl. (1245): " The resurrection of the dead consists formally (a) 
 in the reproduction or restoration of the same body which had perished 
 by death, out of its atoms or particles which had been scattered thence 
 and dispersed ; (b) in the reunion of the same with the soul." 
 
 [2] Quen. (IV, 582) : " The subject of the resurrection is the entire 
 man that had previously died and been reduced to ashes. The subject 
 from which, is the body, the same in number and essence, as we have 
 born in this life, and as had perished through death (Job 19 : 26 ; Is. 
 26: 19; Ps. 34: 21 ; Rom. 8: 11 ; 1 Cor. 15: 53 ; 2 Cor. 5:4; 
 Phil. 3 : 21), yet clothed with new and spiritual qualities (1 Cor. 15 : 
 42). (Observe: The body which will rise again will be spiritual, not 
 as to substance, but as to qualities and endowments.)" Of these new 
 attributes, Holl. (1243) : " The bodies which we bear about with us 
 in this life, differ from the risen bodies not with respect to substance, 
 but (1) with respect to duration ; the former are subject to corruption, 
 and perish ; the latter are free from corruption, and always endure ; (2) 
 with respect to outward form ; the former become unsightly, colorless, 
 offensive corpse* ; the latter will be glorious, brilliant, most beautiful ; 
 (3) with respect to vigor. The former are sown into the earth, feeble 
 and destitute of sense and motion ; the latter will be active, vigorous, 
 abounding in extraordinary senses, subject to no defect; (4) with re- 
 spect to activity and endurance. The former are subject to generation, 
 nutrition, growth, local progress, and feel the need of food, drink, mar- 
 riage ; the latter will be entirely at leisure for spiritual actions, and will 
 not need nourishment or conjugal intercourse." 
 
 [3] Grh. (XIX, 38): " These very qualities of the revived bodies, by 
 reason of which they are distinguished in this life from animal bodies, 
 must be accurately distinguished from each other. For some are com- 
 mon to all the revived, the wicked as well as the godly, the unbelieving 
 
PROPERTIES OF THE RESURRECTION BODY. 643 
 
 as well as the believing. Such are tydapoia nal adavaaia^ incorruptibility 
 and immortality, because the souls and bodies of the wicked are to be 
 lost (not by being annihilated, but by being tortured) in gehenna, Matt. 
 10 : 28, because the worm gnawing them will not die, and the fire burn- 
 ing them will not be quenched (Is. 66 : 24; Mark 9 : 44, 46, 48), and 
 therefore their bodies will likewise rise again incorruptible and immor- 
 tal, never to be separated from the souls, but to be reserved for eternal 
 and never-ending tortures. From this it is also understood that the 
 incorruptibility and immortality in the bodies of the wicked are very 
 different from the incorruptibility and immortality of the godly, both 
 with respect to the rest of the connected qualities, and with respect to 
 the end. . . . But some qualities are peculiar to the godly alone when 
 raised again for everlasting life, which the apostle, 1 Cor. 15, recounts 
 in this order, v. 43-49 ; Phil. 3 : 21 ; from which it is inferred that the 
 bodies of the godly men raised to life eternal will be not only incorrup- 
 tible and immortal, but also; (1) glorified, glorious, because they will 
 be clothed, as with a mantle, with ineffable honor, splendor, and glory ; 
 and therefore, with divine light, lustre, and brilliancy, Matt. 13 : 43 ; 
 Dan. 12 : 3 ; 1 Cor. 15 : 41 ; (2) powerful, because they will be alto- 
 gether free from mortal difficulties and former infirmities, pains and dis- 
 eases, to which they were subject in this life, and therefore, will be 
 strong, vigorous, incapable of suffering, agile, subtle, which neither weight 
 nor gravity will be able to prevent from being caught up into the air 
 to meet the Lord, 1 Thess. 4:17; (3) spiritual, not indeed with respect 
 to essence ; for they will not be spirits, but spiritual bodies, they will be 
 Icdyyeloi (like the angels), not angels, not equal to, or the same as an- 
 gels, Matt. 22 : 30 ; but, by reason of spiritual qualities, their bodies 
 will no longer be natural bodies \_animalia, Vulgate translation, 1 Cor. 
 15 ; 44 of Gr. ipvxiKov^ standing in need of food, drink, sleep, and other 
 supports, but spiritual, in which there is no strife of the flesh and spirit, 
 but which are perfectly subjected to the control of the spirit, are en- 
 tirely ruled by the Holy Ghost, and need no food or other means for 
 their support; [Chemnitz, De Duabus Naturis,^. 175: "Bodies in 
 this life are called Tpvxuca, not because they are transmuted into soul, or 
 of the same substance with the soul, which is a spiritual substance, but 
 because they are moved to action and governed, not by themselves or 
 their own bodily conditions, properties and faculties, but by the power 
 of the soul. So in the resurrection, the bodies will be irvevjuaruca, spirit- 
 ual, not because they will be transmuted into spirit, or be of the same 
 substance with the Holy Spirit, for they will have and retain their na- 
 ture or bodily substance, as Job says : ' In my flesh, I shall see God,' 
 
644 THE LAST THINGS. 
 
 and in the creed we confess that we believe the resurrection of this flesh. 
 But they will be spiritual, because what the soul is now to the body, the 
 Spirit will be to body and soul. For the body will without means be 
 sustained and preserved by the Spirit. And the body with the soul 
 will be most perfectly subject to the direction and control of the Spirit. 
 For in this life the regenerate are led in things pertaining to God by 
 the Spirit of God, but only partially and imperfectly. In the resurrec- 
 tion, however, both body and soul shall, without any resistance, be per- 
 fectly subject to the guidance and control of the Spirit, who will use 
 both bodies and souls of saints, according to his omnipotence, for what- 
 ever movements and operations he wishes ; and the bodies and souls of 
 saints in glory will use the virtue of the Spirit for all movements and 
 operations the Spirit wishes, and will have no longer psychical, but most 
 perfect spiritual conditions and faculties"] ; (4) heavenly, likewise, not 
 with respect to substance but with respect to qualities, because they will 
 shine with heavenly light and glory, will no longer be subject to earthly 
 infirmities, but will be distinguished by their heavenly lustre, and no 
 longer be disfigured, corrupt, imperfect, maimed, and unsightly, but 
 most beautiful, pleasing to the sight, perfect, handsome, and complete 
 in members, etc. An example of these qualities is presented to us in 
 the body of Christ, as raised from the dead and placed at the right hand 
 of God, to which our body is to be made like. But although the bodies 
 of the wicked and the damned will be incorruptible and immortal, yet 
 they will not be impassible, but will be subject to eternal tortures, and 
 will be adorned by no honor, no glory, no power, no spiritual excel- 
 lence, but will be marked by perpetual foulness and ignominy, destined 
 to eternal disgrace, and oppressed by infernal darkness. They are ves- 
 sels made unto dishonor and disgrace, Rom. 9: 21; 2 Tim. 2: 20." 
 According to the characteristics imparted to those raised from the 
 dead, as the saved or lost, their resurrection is termed: "The resurrec- 
 tion to life, which is peculiar to the godly and true believers, and the 
 resurrection to judgment, which is peculiar to the wicked and unbe- 
 lieving." 
 
 [A question to which the Dogmaticians give much attention is as to 
 whether the godless will rise by virtue of the merit of Christ. On this, 
 Grh., XIX, 13: "The virtue whereby Christ will raise the godless, 
 properly speaking does not belong to the merit of Christ, but to the 
 divine power, communicated to his human nature by means of the per- 
 sonal union and exaltation to the right hand of God. This power ex- 
 tends farther and to more objects, than does the merit of Christ, because, 
 by means of this power, Christ also, as man, sustains, rules and governs 
 
THE GENERAL JUDGMENT. 645 
 
 all things in Heaven and earth, in his general kingdom, called the king- 
 dom of power. The resurrection of the godless pertains rather to his 
 functions as Judge, than as Mediator and Saviour; as may be inferred 
 from the end of the resurrection."] 
 
 § 65. (3.) Of the Final Judgment. 
 
 Upon the resurrection of the dead there follows the final jndg - 
 ment, and then the end of this world will have been reached. [1] 
 There will, therefore, still be men living upon this earth when 
 the final judgment comes, and these will not experience a reunit- 
 ing of soul and body, as no death has preceded; the change, 
 however, that takes place in the bodies of those raised from the 
 dead, will take place in theirs also, but in a different manner, 
 viz., by transformation. [2] The precise time when the final 
 judgment will take place is not known to us, [3] but signs will 
 precede it from which the approach of that day may be inferred. 
 Such are, especially, the most extreme development of Satan's 
 power, and the like extraordinary security and ungodliness of 
 men. [4] When all this shall have reached the highest degree, 
 God will cause judgment to break forth, and thus become for the 
 godly the helper in the highest need. The judgment will be 
 held by Christ, [5] who will appear to all, visibly and in glory, 
 to the longed-for consolation of the godly, and to the fearful 
 terror of the ungodly. [6] Then, in the case of all, everything 
 will be revealed that they have done, the good and the evil; all 
 will then be judged according to the law of the revelation given 
 to them upon earth, [7] and judgment will be executed upon 
 them all in such a manner, that the godly will be admitted to 
 the kingdom of glory, and the ungodly will be driven out into 
 the kingdom of eternal darkness. [8] 
 
 [1] Quen. (IV, 605): " The general judgment is, with respect to 
 order, subsequent to the resurrection of the dead, 1 Thess. 4: 16. For 
 the general judgment will immediately succeed the general resurrection 
 of the dead. The resurrection will occur on the last or latest of all days, 
 and will place an end to the vicissitude of worldly things, and there- 
 fore to time itself, John 11 : 24." 
 
 Holl. (1246): "The final general judgment is a solemn act, by 
 which the triune God, through the Lord Jesus Christ, appearing in a 
 
646 THE LAST THINGS. 
 
 visible form and with the highest glory, will place all angels and men 
 before his judgment-seat, for the purpose of judging all thoughts, words, 
 and deeds, of the godly, indeed, according to the norm of the Gospel, 
 but of the wicked, according to the precept of the Law ; and will assign 
 to the former, and confer upon them, eternal joys, and, to the latter, 
 eternal tortures, to the glory of his retributive and vindicatory justice." 
 A distinction is also made between this general or final judgment and 
 " the particular judgment by which, at the hour of death, a state of glory 
 or of ignominy is awarded every man." 
 
 [Grh. XVIII, 35: "There are five reasons, because of which the 
 general, universal and public judgment ought to occur, even though a 
 particular and private judgment precede : 
 
 1. The manifestation of divine glory, viz., that the justice and mercy 
 of God may be displayed. For since, in this life, it seems to be well to 
 the wicked and ill to the good, and, on this account, divine Providence 
 is attacked by malevolent critics, God will appoint a day, in which, in 
 the presence of the whole world, he will display his supreme justice 
 against the godless, and his supreme mercy towards the godly, and 
 in the sight of all angels and men declare, that, in connection with 
 supreme mercy towards the godly, he uses no cruelty or injustice to- 
 wards the godless, and in connection with supreme severity towards 
 the godless, he uses no respect of persons or unjust liberality towards 
 the godly. 
 
 2. The glorification of Christ: " We see not yet all things put under 
 him," Heb. 2 : 8, "but then he shall come in his majesty," Matt. 25: 
 31. As at his first advent, he was unjustly condemned as a culprit be- 
 fore all; so at his second advent, he shall judge all, as a just and glor- 
 ious Judge. 
 
 3. The exaltation of the godly. As in this life, the godly "are made 
 a spectacle unto the world, and to angels, and to men," 1 Cor. 4 : 9, so 
 in the final judgment before the whole world, all angels and men, it is 
 right that they be pronounced and crowned as victors. 
 
 4. The completion of rewards and punishments. The souls of godly 
 and ungodly, separated from their bodies, receive only the beginnings 
 of blessedness and condemnation, but then the entire man, consisting of 
 body and soul, will be judged, and will receive in his body the comple- 
 tion of rewards and punishments. 
 
 5. The consideration of good and evil works still continuing. For the 
 good and evil works of the dead are not yet finished. Prophets and 
 Apostles still serve the Church by their writing and example ; heresi- 
 archs still corrupt the minds of men by their writings ; when, then, on 
 
SIGNS OF THE END. 647 
 
 the 'day of judgment, the good and evil deeds of the dead will be fin- 
 ished with the world itself, the ultimate and decisive sentence will be 
 given."] 
 
 [2] Quen. (IV, 585): "The circumstance most closely connected 
 with the resurrection of the dead, is the change of those whom the last 
 day will find alive, which is to take place in a moment and in the twink- 
 ling of an eye, 1 Cor. 15 : 51, 52; 1 Thess. 4: 15, 17." The order of 
 the resurrection is the following, Hfrffr. (682) : "When the last day 
 will dawn, Christ (while, by m^ans of fire, heaven and earth are pass- 
 ing away with a great noise) will come in the clouds in the same visible 
 form in which he ascended into the heavens, with many thousands of 
 angels, with the greatest shout or thunder, in the voice of the archangel 
 and the trump of God ; and then the dead, hearing the voice of the Son 
 of God, will first rise, each one in his own body ; then we, whom that 
 day will find alive, will be changed in a moment, so as to be placed be- 
 fore the judgment-seat, 1 Thess. 4: 15." 
 
 [3] Grh. (XIX, 226) : " The time of the final judgment can be re- 
 garded as twofold, of the beginning and of the continuance. The time 
 of the beginning we define as precisely that point of time in which 
 Christ will return from heaven to judge the living and raise the dead to 
 life, and, by means of the ministry of angels, to assemble both before 
 his judgment-seat for the purpose of hearing a decisive sentence. The 
 Holy Scriptures testify that this will occur on the last day, in which 
 also the resurrection of the dead will precede the judgment, and the end 
 of the world will follow, Matt. 24 : 30 ; 25 : 31 ; 1 Cor. 15 : 52 ; 1 
 Thess. 4: 16 ; Rev. 20 : 11 ; but what day will be the last and latest, 
 and, therefore, on what day or what hour Christ will come to judgment, 
 we believe that no man can know exactly and precisely, and, therefore, 
 we ought to abstain from bold and anxious inquiry concerning it, Acts 
 1 : 7." 
 
 [4] Holl. (1248) : " From the will and appointment of God, di- 
 vinely revealed signs will precede the last day, from which it can be 
 known in a general way that that great day is approaching." The 
 signs are distinguished as remote or general signs, and near or peculiar 
 signs. Holl. (ib.) : " The former occur not in merely one age, and 
 frequently recur, or are continued. The latter are those which are to 
 be seen only as the judgment approaches nearer, but not likewise in 
 former ages. The general and more remote signs, although they do 
 not seem to indicate the time of judgment, yet according to God's ap- 
 pointment and intention, indicate and ought to admonish Christians, 
 from the force of divine justice and the truth of the predictions, that an 
 
648 THE LAST THINGS. 
 
 appointed judgment is to be expected. Moreover, among the nearer or 
 peculiar signs, there is this difference, that some precede the judgment 
 by a longer, and others by a shorter interval ; and, for this reason, not 
 even these indicate precisely a certain time." Among the former are 
 enumerated (according to Grh. XIX, 246) : " 1. The multiplication 
 of heresies, Matt. 24: 5." (Concerning this passage Grh. says (ib.) : 
 " The apostles asked, at the same time, both when those things would 
 take place which He had predicted concerning the destruction of the 
 temple, and what would be the sign of His coming, and of the end of 
 the world. Matt. 24 : 3 ; Mark 13:4; Luke 21 : 7. For they thought 
 that it would not be until the second coming of Christ for judgment, 
 that Jerusalem would be destroyed, and the temple, and with it the en- 
 tire world ; and that thus there would be an end of all things, and that 
 then only, when all things would have become new, the Messiah would 
 enter upon his new reign. Christ, therefore, distinctly replies to both 
 members of the question ; and first, indeed, discourses concerning the 
 devastation of Jerusalem, indicating by this itself that they would be 
 not of the same, but of diverse times. Although, therefore, the matters 
 presented by Christ in the first part of his reply pertain properly and 
 principally to the times preceding the destruction of Jerusalem, yet 
 the matters which are predicted in the same place, concerning the 
 coming of false prophets and the rest of the evils that were to 
 precede the devastation of Jerusalem, secondarily and by way of 
 consequence, can be properly referred to the state of the times that 
 precede the final judgment, because the destruction of Jerusalem 
 w r as a type of the general destruction destined for the entire globe. 
 Whence, those things also which are here said by Christ concerning the 
 times that were to precede the destruction of Jerusalem, are adapted in 
 other passages of Scripture to the times that were to precede the end of 
 the world. Cf. Dan. 12 : 1 with Matt. 24: 21, and 2 Pet. 3 : 9 with 
 Matt. 24 : 22). 2. Seditions throughout the entire world, arising from 
 wars, and the disquiet arising from earthquakes, Matt. 24 : 6-8 ; Luke 
 21 : 9-11. 3. Dreadful persecution of the godly, Matt. 24: 9; Mark 13: 
 9; Dan. 11: 44; Rev. 11 : 7 ; 12 : 4, 13 ; 13 : 7 ; 17 : 6 ; 18 : 24; 19: 
 2 ; 20 : 4. 4. An inundation of careless security and defiant wickedness, 
 and extreme depravity of life, Matt. 24: 12, 37-39; Luke 17 : 28-30; 
 18:8; 2 Thess. 2 : 7 ; 2 Tim. 3:1-5; 2 Pet. 3:3. 5. The universal 
 preaching of the Gospel throughout the entire world, Matt. 24 : 14; Dan. 
 11 : 44; Mai. 4 : 2. As near and peculiar signs, the following are cited: 
 (1) The overthrow of the distinguished fourth monarchy (Dan. 2: 31, 
 seq.). (2) The overthrow of Antichrist (for since, in the Church of the 
 
SIGNS OF THE END. 649 
 
 Thessalonians, the report had been spread under the name and pretence 
 of apostolic doctrine, that the last day was immediately at hand, Paul 
 advises the Thessalonians to have no faith in this false opinion, for 
 Antichrist must be revealed before the Day of the Lord will come, 2 
 Thess. 2:3. Of this revelation of Antichrist, and his conquest by the 
 preaching of the Gospel, other prophecies of Scripture also speak, Dan. 
 8 : 25 ; 11 : 44 ; Jer. 51 : 58 ; Mai. 4:5; Rev. 14:6; 18:2); the ob- 
 serving of various signs, in all parts of the entire universe, Matt. 24: 
 29 ; Mark 13 : 24; Luke 21 : 25." Be. (377) : " Remarkable eclipses 
 of the heavenly bodies and their fall to the earth," "for although we 
 have not the mode and precise nature of these heavenly signs, and es- 
 pecially of the fall of the stars to the earth, revealed ; yet it is better in 
 these matters to retain the letter of Scripture, and to leave the manner 
 of the occurrence to divine wisdom and power, than, the literal sense 
 being deserted, to seek or embrace a metaphor, especially since in other 
 connections express mention is made of heavenly signs, as contradistin- 
 guished from earthly, Luke 21 : 25." Holl. (1148) : " There are 
 some who explain the words of Christ mystically, as referring to a re- 
 markable change of the Church, the obscuring of the heavenly doctrine, 
 and the apostasy of the Church's teachers; others advise that the literal 
 sense be not abandoned." As to the purpose for which these scriptur- 
 ally foretold signs were intended, Gkh. (XIX, 274) : " Christ made 
 the predictions to the end that they might be : (1) Indicative of his 
 love towards us. To advise any one beforehand of coming evils is the 
 office of a friendly and kind mind. (2) A means of driving avjay se- 
 curity. (3) Antidotes against over-anxiety. Christ predicted signs of 
 the judgment, by which it could be recognized beforehand, but was un- 
 willing to determine a definite day of judgment ; this avails to drive 
 away security from our minds, lest we should think that the decisive 
 and judicial day were still far off; but it also avails for the removal of 
 curiosity, lest we should boldly dare to search, into that which God has 
 placed in his own power and knowledge. Just as death is certain, but 
 the hour of death is uncertain, so it is certain that the final judgment 
 will at some time follow, but the hour of judgment is uncertain and un- 
 known to men, Matt. 24: 44; Luke 10: 46. (4) As remedies for pu- 
 sillanimity. Just in the proportion that numerous and terrible evils be- 
 fall the godly, do they hasten the more rapidly the day of redemption 
 and refreshing" (a-nolvrpuaeug kcll dvaipi^ecjg). Gerh. (XX, 95): " The 
 Millennarians teach that, before the last day, Christ will return from 
 heaven to earth, to raise the godly dead, and, with them, together with 
 those also whom he will find alive, all the godless being suppressed, to 
 42 
 
650 THE EAST THINGS. 
 
 pass on this earth for a thousand years, a life abounding in corporeal 
 pleasures, an earthly, corporeal and visible reign being begun ; and that 
 then, when the thousand years of this reign shall have been finished, the 
 end of the world and the general resurrection of all shall follow." 
 
 In regard to Antichrist, we remark that the word is used in a twofold 
 sense by the Dogmaticians. Holl. (2070) : " (a) Generically, for all 
 heretics who disseminate doctrines that are false and conflict with the 
 doctrine of Christ, and who obstinately defend these. Concerning 
 those who are commonly called little Antichrists, 1 John 2 : 18. (6) 
 Specifically, and by pre-eminence, for that remarkable adversary of 
 Christ, described in 2 Thess. 2, whom, for the purpose of making a dis- 
 sinction, we call the great Antichrist." A distinction is made also be- 
 tween the Eastern and the Western Antichrist. Quen. (IV, 522) : 
 " The Eastern is outside of the Church, and is called, Ez. 38: 2 ; Rev. 
 20 : 7, 8, Gog and Magog. The Western sits in the very lap of the 
 Church, and of this we are here treating. Some of the fathers thought 
 that this would be a Jew springing from the tribe of Dan, and the Pap- 
 ists also generally follow this opinion, but we are certain that Anti- 
 christ has his origin not from the Jews, but from the assembly of Chris- 
 tians, or from those who make a Christian profession, 2 Thess. 2 : 3, 4 
 seq." 
 
 Of Antichrist it is held, Br. (783) : (He is) " not any one particular 
 human individual. For (1) Antichrist was to come, when that which 
 hindered the erection of his government (viz., the ancient Eastern 
 Roman empire, whose seat was at Rome) would be removed ; but he 
 was to continue until the glorious advent of Christ; now, this duration, 
 for so many ages, altogether exceeds the life of one man. (2) The 
 Scriptures describe the origin or planting, and the progress or growth of 
 Antichrist in such a manner that it is impossible for all to occur in the 
 life of one man, that is, if we consider that the power was to have been 
 derived from hidden beginnings, not so much by means of arms and 
 open violence as by insidious arts by which the minds of men are grad- 
 ually occupied and brought over to its side, and that, too, not in one 
 nation or- people, but throughout the greatest part of the earth ; and 
 that kings and nations were to make use of his society to satiety and 
 nausea, and to avail themselves of his aid for persecuting the saints, etc., 
 according to Rev. 13, 14, 17, concerning the beast and the great 
 whore." Thereupon the Pope was declared to be Antichrist. Quen. 
 (IV, 526) : " These marks of Antichrist are to be taken here not apart 
 and separately, but unitedly and together, and thus taken they exactly 
 coincide with the Pope of Rome, whence the conclusion emerges, that 
 
THE GENERAL CONVERSION OF THE JEWS. 651 
 
 the Pope of Rome is the great Antichrist, predicted by the Holy 
 Ghost." 
 
 Among the events that are to occur before the final judgment, (1) 
 some, even among Lutheran theologians, enumerate the general conver- 
 sion of the Jews. By the great majority, however, this opinion is re- 
 jected. Holl. (1263): "Although access to repentance and faith in 
 Christ has not been debarred the Jews by an absolute decree of God, 
 and many of them, in the course of time from the apostolic era down- 
 ward, have returned into favor with God, yet their universal, or their 
 certainly manifest and solemn conversion about the time of the end of 
 the world, is not to be expected." The passage, Rom. 11 : 25, 26, 
 which seems most distinctly to teach such a general conversion, is thus 
 explained by Holl. (1269): " (a) The proposition of Paul is universal, 
 not absolutely, but with limitation. The limitation exists in this very 
 chapter, 11, v. 2, likewise v, 5, also v. 23. Wherefore, wirh the limi- 
 tation added, the meaning is: 'All Israel that God foreknew would be- 
 lieve in Christ will be saved,' or, ' All Israel elect unto eternal life will 
 be saved,' or, 'All the Israelites who do not remain in unbelief will 
 be saved.' But it is not lawful to conclude from this ' the whole nation 
 of Israelites, or the greater part of the Jews, will be saved,' since it is 
 evident that the faith does not belong to all, nor the election to many ; 
 the particle axP c s °v, until or as far as, does not always denote the ceasing 
 from or end of anything, but frequently, in affirmative propositions, a 
 continuation so as to be equipollent with always. Wherefore the mind 
 of the apostle is : As long as the conversion of the Gentiles and their 
 entrance into the Church will continue, so long will Jews be successively 
 converted. But the conversion of Gentiles will continue during the en- 
 tire time of the New Testament ; therefore, so also the conversion of 
 of Jews." 
 
 Geh. (XIX, 293): " Neither can the absolutely universal conversion 
 of all the Jews be hoped for. For, as the fulness of the Gentiles does 
 not denote nations taken individually and collectively, and their indi- 
 viduals taken one by one, but a great number from the nations of the 
 Gentiles, so also by 'all Israel' the entire Jewish people and all their 
 individuals are not indicated, but only a great multitude of the Jewish 
 nation." 
 
 (2) Others not of the Lutheran Church enumerate as among these 
 events, "A coming of Christ, to be expected before the final judgment, for 
 the purpose of establishing a kingdom on this earth under the control of 
 the elect for a thousand years (Chiliasm)." But the Lutheran Church 
 has always taught as follows (Quex., IV, 649): '• Since the second advent 
 
652 THE LAST THINGS. 
 
 of Christ, the general resurrection, the final judgment, and the end of the 
 world are immediately united, and one follows the other without an in- 
 terval of time, it is manifest that before the completion of the judgment 
 no earthly kingdom, and life abounding in all spiritual and bodily plea- 
 sure, as the Chiliasts or Millennarians dream, is to be expected." Conf. 
 Aug. (XVII, 4): " They condemn others also, who now scatter Jewish 
 opinions, that before the resurrection of the dead the godly shall occupy 
 the kingdom of the world, the wicked being everywhere suppressed." 
 The following are mentioned as such Chiliasts: "The Jews, Cerinthus, 
 Papias, Joachim (Abbot of Floris), the Fanatics and Anabaptists, Casp. 
 Schwenkfeld, and others." A distinction is also made between " gross 
 and subtile Chiliasm. The. former estimates the millennium as happy, 
 because of the illicit pleasure of the flesh ; the latter, because of the law- 
 ful and honorable delights of both body and soul." (Holl., 1256.) 
 But both are rejected. Grh. (XX, 109): "But. . . it clearly ap- 
 pears that the hope and opinion of all concerning this Chiliastic govern- 
 ment is not the same. 1. For some contend for a subtile Chiliasm con- 
 sisting in the peace of the Church, perfect justice, rest from temptations, 
 universal conformity with the orthodox faith, etc., but others for a gross 
 Chiliasm, driven hither and thither by bodily delights and pleasures. 2. 
 Some hope that this kingdom will begin before the resurrection, others 
 after the resurrection ; unless we be willing to unite these two dissenting 
 opinions by this bond of distinction, that it will begin after the resurrec- 
 tion of the saints, or certainly of the martyrs, and before the universal 
 resurrection of all men. 3. Some present their own opinions as proba- 
 ble, and, in suspense and doubt, commit the whole matter to the future 
 issue ; but others are earnest in their endeavors to obtrude them upon 
 the Church, with the necessity of belief, as arguments evident bfyond 
 contradiction. 4. Some dispute in schools and books theoretically con- 
 cerning the Chiliastic and imaginary kingdom, but others endeavor to 
 accomplish it practically, as the Anabaptists of Miinster, who taught 
 that all wicked magistrates must be removed from their midst, in order 
 that that most peaceful rule might follow. 5. Some say, in general, that 
 the kingdom of Christ must be established on this earth, but others desig- 
 nate the land of Canaan in particular, as that into which the Jews are to be 
 brought back. 6. Some say that the time of the duration of this kingdom 
 is known precisely to God alone, but others assign to it precisely a thou- 
 sand years. 7. Some hope that all the godly and saints will first be raised, 
 in order to become partners in this kingdom ; the Jews, that Israelites 
 alone ; Piscator, that the martyrs alone ; some say that they will die again 
 before the final judgment, but others hope that they will live forever with 
 
CHILIASM. 653 
 
 Christ. 8. Some dispute concerning this kingdom from the Holy Scrip- 
 tures, others from the Sibylline oracles, others from apostolic traditions, 
 others from the Apocryphal Books, the fourth book of Esdras especially. 
 Thus, therefore, its patrons do not at all agree among themselves con- 
 cerning the nature, the time, and the subjects of this kingdom, and the 
 mode and grounds of discussion with regard to it." 
 
 The principal passages to which Chiliasts appealed are Is. 65 : 22 ; 
 Matt. 26: 29; Jn. 10: 16; Eph. 5: 5; 1 Thess. 4: 17; Rev. 20: 
 6. The last, which is the chief passage, Grh. (XX, 124 sq.) thus ex- 
 plains : " The opinion of those seems especially probable who place the 
 beginning of these ' thousand years ' in the empire of Constantine the 
 Great; for then Satan, who, in the first three centuries from the birth 
 of Christ, had impelled the heathen emperors and Roman proconsuls to 
 horrible persecutions of the Christians, was bound, as under Constantine 
 peace was given to the Church, and persecutions ceased, neither were the 
 nations of which the Apocalypse especially makes mention, able any 
 longer with such violence and cruelty to propagate their rage for idols. 
 According to this hypothesis, the end of these thousand years will fall 
 in the year of Christ 1300, about which time Satan, being again re- 
 leased, aroused the Ottoman family, under which Gog and Magog, i. e., 
 the Turkish empire . . . acquired the greatest strength, and the Sara- 
 cen race raged against the Church with a greater effort than before, the 
 greatest and most flourishing part of the world having been occupied, 
 and the city of Constantinople having at length been taken, which was 
 the seat of the Eastern empire ; so that in this manner, between the 
 empire of Constantine, who warded off persecutions from the Church, 
 and that of the Ottoman Turk, who greatly afflicted the Church, these 
 thousand years intervene. And because horrible persecutions, excited 
 by the heathen emperors, in which several thousand Christians were 
 slain, preceded this binding of Satan, and the rest for the Church which 
 followed at length under Constantine the Great, John, in his vision, 
 introduces the souls of the martyrs who had been beheaded or slain 
 because of the testimony of Jesus, and because of the Word of God. 
 
 . . . To these he joins the souls of those who had not adored the 
 beast and his image, nor received his mark on their foreheads or in 
 their hands. . . . Concerning these souls of godly martyrs and confes- 
 sors, to which also may be added the souls of those who were killed 
 when Satan was loosed in the persecutions of the Papists and Turks, 
 John declares first ' that seats of judgment were given,' viz., as a sign 
 of the judgment they were to exercise ; secondly, that they lived ; and 
 thirdly, that they reigned with Christ a thousand years. They exer- 
 
654 THE LAST THINGS. 
 
 cised judgment against their persecutors, by whom they were killed. 
 For, as the blood of the godly cries out from earth to heaven, and begs 
 for punishment against those who have shed it, so also their souls in 
 heaven cry out under the altar, and beg for vengeance for their own 
 blood and that of their brethren. They have lived evidently in heav- 
 enly peace, tranquillity, and glory. The tyrants passed sentence that 
 they should be destroyed both in soul and body, but the Holy Ghost, in 
 this passage, and frequently elsewhere in the Scriptures, bears witness 
 that immediately after death they live in heavenly glory. Finally, 
 ' they reigned with Christ,' i. e., all enemies, the devil, the flesh, the 
 world, and all adversaries having been entirely overcome. Neither 
 from the particle 'until' are we permitted to infer that when this 'a 
 thousand years' shall have been finished, the happiness of the saints 
 will also have been ended. . . . But for this reason the thousand years 
 are expressly mentioned, because when they have been completed, what 
 happens to the Church is memorable, viz., that, Satan being again re- 
 leased, it shall be attacked anew by the most grievous persecutions." 
 Holl. (1259) : " (1) Because the Apocalypse is a prophetic book, full 
 of most abstruse visions, as well as allegorical and quasi-enigmatical forms 
 of speech, difficult to be understood, and therefore to be expounded ac- 
 cording to the analogy of the faith, based upon clear and perspicuous 
 Scripture passages. (2) The Chiliasts cannot clearly show from the 
 cited passage the solemn advent of Christ to establish a millennial king- 
 dom in which (a) men shall live endowed with a perfect knowledge of 
 God, distinguished for consummate holiness and rejoicing in earthly 
 felicity ; (b) the martyrs shall rise from the head ; (c) all the Jews be 
 converted, and (d) at its commencement Antichrist be overturned." 
 
 [5] Br. (379): " The judge will be Christ himself (Matt. 25 : 31 ; 
 according to both natures, John 5 : 22, 27), who, gloriously appearing 
 in his assumed humanity, and seated as upon a judgment-seat, conspic- 
 uous to all, will pronounce sentence with authority divine. Moreover, 
 Christ will have holy men, Matt. 19 : 28 ; Luke 22 : 30 ; 1 Cor. 6:2; 
 and good angels, Matt. 25 : 31, partly as judges and partly as minister- 
 ing attendants of the judgment. And, indeed, it will be the office of 
 the angels not only to accompany Christ to judgment, and to manifest 
 his advent by sending forth a great sound (1 Thess. 4 : 16), but also to 
 assemble, from all parts of the world (Matt. 24: 31; Mark 13: 27), 
 both those who have been raised from the dead and those found alive, 
 then to separate the godly from the wicked (Matt. 13: 41, 49), by 
 placing the former at the right hand and the latter at the left (Matt. 
 25 : 32), and then to thrust the damned to hell (Matt. 13: 42, 50). 
 
MANNER OF THE SECOND COMING. 655 
 
 But holy men will be the witnesses and approvers of Christ's judg- 
 ment." 
 
 [6] Holl. (1249) : " The advent of Christ as judge will be public, 
 and exceedingly glorious, terrible to the wicked, and greatly longed for 
 by the godly." 
 
 [Grh. treats of a number of supplementary questions : 
 
 1. Is Christ's return to judgment contradictory to his presence on 
 earth in both natures ? Here we must distinguish between modes of 
 presence, 1 Kings 19: 11: " God was not in the wind;" and yet it 
 could not be said absolutely that God was not there, but only that there 
 was no manifestation of his presence. So in Ex. 33 : 3, the presence of 
 his grace, but not of his power, is denied. 
 
 2. "Will his return be local? Yes; nevertheless not successive, as 
 though during a period of time he will descend from heaven in the 
 clouds, as at the ascension he was gradually received into heaven, but 
 sudden and momentary, Matt. 24 : 43 ; Luke 12 : 39; 1 Thess. 5:2; 
 2 Pet. 3 : 10 ; Rev. 16:15; Luke 21 : 35. 
 
 3. What of the clouds? After stating the various interpretations, as 
 that they are used metaphorically to represent the serenity, or the se- 
 verity of divine judgment, or the saints who will attend him, Jude 5 : 15, 
 who are called in Heb. 12 : 1, "a cloud of witnesses," he prefers the lit- 
 eral interpretation, " since, in articles of faith, we must not depart from 
 the letter without urgent necessity." 
 
 4. Why will he come in the clouds? (a) They are God's throne and 
 chariot, Ps. 104: 3 ; Is. 19 : 1. (b) At his ascension, a cloud received 
 him, Acts 1 : 9, cf. v. 11. (c) At his transfiguration, a cloud over- 
 shadowed him, Matt. 17 : 5 ; Mark 9:7; Luke 9: 34. (d) The anal- 
 ogy of the cloud which separated the Israelites from the Egyptians, Ex. 
 14 : 19, dark to the one, bright to the other, Ps. 105 : 39. (e) In the 
 Old Testament, his glory appeared in the cloud, Ex. 16 : 10 ; 19 : 9 ; 
 40 : 38 ; Num. 12:5; 2 Chr. 5 : 13. 
 
 5. In what form will he be seen ? Some think that the wicked will 
 see him as he was crucified, arguing from Zach. 12 : 10. But Scrip- 
 ture leaves no doubt, Matt. 16 : 27; 24: 30, i. e., he will be seen in a 
 glorified form by all. Nevertheless we must distinguish between the 
 beatific vision of the godly and the terrifying vision of the godless, 
 
 Quenst. (IV, 622) considering whether he will display the wounds 
 of his passion, as he reappears, refers to the dissent of Brentz and Ae- 
 gidius Hunnius, who maintained that they were laid aside with his res- 
 urrection, and only displayed to his disciples by a peculiar dispensation, 
 in order to prove the truth of the resurrection-body, and after quoting 
 
656 THE LAST THINGS. 
 
 Luther, Chemnitz and Grh. on the other side (that "they are retained, 
 yet so as to occasion no deformity, but so as to render his body all the 
 more beautiful, and affording the more consolation"), concludes: 
 
 "Almost all the holy doctors of the Church have been of the opinion 
 that Christ Jesus, not only by a peculiar dispensation, showed the marks 
 of his wounds to his disciples after his resurrection, but also that he has 
 ascended into heaven imprinted with these as seals of his victory and 
 triumph, and that he displays the same now in heaven to his Father and 
 the holy angels, and that he will offer them to the sight of all on the 
 last day. But this opinion, since it is not expressly propounded in Holy 
 Scriptures, we do not maintain as an article of faith, but as a dogma not 
 contrary to the analogy of faith, supported by the authority of antiquity, 
 useful to excite devotion, and most full of consolation."] 
 
 [7] Quen. (IV, 611): "The norm of this judgment is, indeed, 
 generally speaking, with respect to the men to be judged, the entire 
 heavenly doctrine, John 12: 48; Rom. 2: 16; but specially, and with 
 respect to the pious, the Gospel, strictly so called, and as contradistin- 
 guished from the Law, Gal. 3 : 9, 12; Matt. 25: 34; .but with respect 
 to the unbelieving, the Law, Gal. 3: 10 ; Rom. 2: 12; 1 Cor. 6: 9, 
 10; Gal. 5:19, 20, 21 : the Law, I say, but not alone, and considered 
 by itself, but as it has been illumined by the Gospel." 
 
 [8] Quen. (IV, 610): "The form of the final judgment consists in 
 the judicial examination of a case, Matt. 25 : 35, 42 ; 1 Cor. 4:5; in 
 the decision of the case when examined, as also in the publication of a 
 definitive sentence, Matt. 25 : 46 ; and finally in the execution of the 
 sentence." A distinction is made between judgment of examination 
 and of retribution. Holl. (1253): "In the judgment of examination 
 (discussionis), the cases of all men, the just as well as the unjust, will 
 be investigated, and the wicked deeds of the unjust, having been accu- 
 rately examined, will be published. In the judgment of retribution, a 
 sentence suitable to each one will be pronounced. This judgment will 
 be twofold, of approbation, or absolution, by which eternal life will be 
 assigned to the elect, and conferred upon them, and of reprobation or 
 condemnation, by which reprobates will be sent away into eternal fire." 
 As to the mode of procedure, Hfrffr. (683): " Not that troublesome 
 and continued din of a forensic court of justice, where the truth must be 
 elicited, and the judge informed by means of certain articles, inquiries, 
 replies, and prolix examinations of witnesses ; but, since the president 
 of this court is true God and man, and the searcher of hearts, he not 
 only knows and observes all things, but will bring every secret word, 
 deed, thought, desire, and purpose into clear light (their conscience bear- 
 
THE END OF THE WORLD. 657 
 
 ing witness, and the wicked being separated from the good, the former 
 being placed at the left, and the latter at the right hand), and will pro- 
 nounce and execute sentence against the wicked without the interven- 
 tion of any delay. This process is described by Christ himself, Matt. 
 25, and by Paul, 2 Cor. 5 : 10." 
 
 § 66. ( 4.) Of the End of the World. 
 
 After the final judgment, the absolute end of this world will 
 come; angels and men excepted, everything that belongs to this 
 world will be burnt up by fire and reduced, to nothing. [I] Not 
 a transformation of the world, therefore, but an absolute anni- 
 hilation of its substance is to be expected. [2] 
 
 V 
 
 [1] Be. (385): "AYhen the judgment shall have been finished, the 
 end of the world will immediately follow, whereby heaven and earth, 
 and likewise the other elements and the bodies composed of elements, 
 with respect to their substance, will perish by means of fire." Holl. 
 (1273): " The consummation of the world is an action of the triune 
 God, by which, to the glory of his truth, power, and justice, and the 
 deliverance of elect men, he will destroy with fire and annihilate the 
 entire fabric of heaven and earth, and all created things, intelligent 
 creatures alone excepted." Of the means by which God will destroy 
 the world (Holl., 1275): " God will destroy the world by means of 
 true and proper fire (2 Pet. 3 : 12); but its power and nature no mortal 
 is able to investigate." 
 
 [2] Quen. (IV, 638): " The form of this consummation consists not 
 in the mere change, alteration, or renewing of qualities, but in the total 
 abolition and reduction of the world's substance itself to nothing (Ps. 
 105:26; 2 Pet. 3:10, Eev. 20 : 11 ; Is. 34 : 4 ; Luke 21 : 33 ; Job 
 14: 12)." 
 
 § 67. ( 5.) Of Eternal Damnation and Eternal Life. 
 With the judgment a complete and eternal separation takes 
 place between the ungodly and the godly. The former are 
 delivered over to eternal damnation, a condition which in Scrip- 
 ture is also called eternal death (" eternal death, eternal damna- 
 tion, is a condition most miserable through the aggregation of 
 multitudinous evils, and to last forever." Holl., (978).) [1] The 
 Holy Scriptures say of them that they are in hell (a^r, ^K^ a 
 place of torment, [2] in which they suffer, according to the de- 
 
658 THE LAST THINGS. 
 
 gree of their ungodliness, [3] in bodily and spiritual pains, [4] for 
 their sins, eternally. [5] The latter, however, the godly, become 
 partakers of eternal life. [6] i. e., they enjoy, according to the 
 degree of their godliness, [7] the highest and completely undis- 
 turbed happiness in beholding the face of God. [8] The place of 
 their happiness is called in the Scriptures heaven. [9] 
 
 [1] Holl. (979) : " Death eternal is the separation of the unbeliev- 
 ing soul from the beatific sight of God and eternal enjoyment." Quen. 
 (I, 565) : " Death eternal or damnation is that most unhappy state in 
 which, from the just judgment of God, men who remain unbelieving to 
 the end, being excluded from the beatific sight of God, and associated 
 in the infernal prison with devils, will be tortured eternally (in soul, im- 
 mediately after its departure from the body, and in both parts of their 
 composite being, at length when sentence has been passed at the final 
 judgment) with the most severe and ineffable torments, to the praise of 
 the divine truth, and the glory and exultation of the godly." Holl. 
 (979) : " Death eternal is named likewise the second death, Rev. 2: 11 ; 
 20 : 6, because it occasions the forfeiture of that other life which man 
 was able to attain when the present life had been completed ; besides it 
 is called corruption, Jude 12; Matt. 7 : 13 ; everlasting destruction, 2 
 Thess. 1:9; not as though eternal death were an annihilation of sub- 
 stance, but because it is the forfeiture or the want of happiness, and 
 shame, and everlasting contempt, Dan. 12: 2, since there is nothing 
 more contemptible, in the eyes of God, the angels, and the blessed, than 
 the damned, for they will be an abhorring unto all flesh, Is. 66: 24 
 everlasting punishment, Matt. 25 : 46 ; tribulation and anguish, Rom 
 2: 9." Quen. (I, 551) presents scriptural proofs from Ps. 49 : 15, 20 
 Is. 66: 24; Dan. 12 : 2 ; Zach. 9 : 11 ; Matt. 3 : 10 ; Luke 3: 17 
 Matt. 5 : 22 ; 25 : 46 ; 8 : 12 ; Luke 13 : 27, 28 ; Matt. 10 : 28 ; 13 : 40 
 42; 22: 13; 25: 41, 46; Luke 16: 23. (Grh. (XX, 169) adds 
 " Reasons and arguments sought (1) from the condition of divine jus 
 tice, 2 Thess. 1:6; (2) from the curse of the divine law, Deut. 27 
 26; Matt. 19 : 16 ; Rom. 4 : 15 ; 1 Thess. 1 : 10 ; (3) from the deform- 
 ity and confusion of sin, Rom. 6 : 23 ; (4) from the witness of one's own 
 conscience; (5) from the tasting of the pains of hell, 2 Sam. 22: 6; 
 Ps. 18: 5; 30: 3; 49: 15; 86: 13; 88: 4; 116: 3; (6) from the article 
 concerning the descent of Christ ad inferos; (7) from the resurrection 
 of the wicked ; (8) from the administration of the final judgment.") 
 
 [2] Grh. (XX, 175) ; " The name hell can be received in a twofold 
 manner : (1) for eternal death ; (2) for that place (nov), in which they 
 
THE TORMENTS OF THE DAMNED. 659 
 
 suffer, and to eternity will sustain that most miserable condition and 
 those ineffable tortures. By reason of the former signification, the 
 devils are said to carry about with them their own hell wherever they 
 wander. By reason of the latter, it is said that on the clay of judgment 
 they will be cast into hell, and be confined there. In the former signi- 
 fication, the name hell is received internally and formally; in the latter, 
 externally, objectively, and locally, the term used in the article being re- 
 ceived in a general sense, according to the language of Scripture, Luke 
 16 : 28. What hell is, in the former signification, cannot be understood, 
 more correctly than by collecting and distributing, into certain classes, 
 the descriptions by which, in the Holy Scriptures, the extreme misery 
 of the damned is prefigured. But what hell is, in the latter significa- 
 tion, pertains to a question that is extremely difficult and obscure. 
 Some altogether reject the latter signification, and think that hell should 
 not be defined except by the sense of divine wrath, and of the eternal 
 curse and horror of conscience. But there is no apparent reason why a 
 certain place (ttov), in which the damned suffer their punishments, 
 should be denied." Holl. (984) : " It is certain that the infernal 
 prison is in a real locality (Luke 16 : 28 ; 1 Pet. 3 : 19), separate from 
 the abode of the blessed (Rev. 22 : 15 ; Luke 16 : 23). It is also prob- 
 able that the same is outside of this habitable world (2 Pet. 3 : 10 : 
 John 12 : 31 ; Matt. 8: 12); but where this place definitely is, is un- 
 known to men during the present life." 
 
 [3] Holl. (990): "The punishments of hell differ in degree, accord- 
 ing to the quality and measure of sins, Matt. 11 : 24. Luke 12 : 47 ; 
 Matt. 23 : 15." 
 
 [4] Hfrffk. (691) : ft They are the most exquisite pains of soul and 
 body (for both had sinned), arising from the fear and sense of the most 
 just wrath and vengeance of God against sins, the most sad conscious- 
 ness of which they carry about with them, the baseness of which is 
 manifest, and of which, likewise, no remission afterwards, and, therefore, 
 no mitigation or end can be hoped for. Whence, in misery, they will 
 execrate, with horrible lamentation and wailing, their former impiety, 
 by which they carelessly neglected the admonitions of their brethren 
 and all the means of attaining salvation; but in vain. For in perpetual 
 anguish, with dreadful trembling, in shame, confusion, and ignominy, 
 in inextinguishable fire, in weeping and gnashing of teeth, amidst that 
 which is eternal and terrible, torn away from the grace and favor of 
 God, they must quake among devils, and will be tortured without end 
 to eternity. These future torments of the damned far surpass all the 
 penetration of the human mind, so that we are not sufficient to ever 
 
660 THE LAST THINGS. 
 
 comprehend in thought their greatness ; therefore, what they will be, 
 or of what nature, cannot be at all expressed in words. Scripture, 
 nevertheless, in order to show that these tortures are the greatest and 
 most exquisite, likens them to those things by which, in this life, pain 
 both of soul and body is accustomed to be excited. For this reason 
 they are compared now to the gnashing of teeth, now to worms, now to 
 the most sorrowful darkness, and whatever other matters of sadness and 
 of the most complete pain can be mentioned, Is. 66: 24; Matt. 5: 22; 
 8: 12; Rev. 19: 20." Quen. (1,562): " The form (of eternal death) 
 is the entire mass of evils intended for the damned. These are partly 
 privative, and partly positive. The privative are: (1) forfeiture of 
 the beatific sight of God; Matt. 25 : 41 ; 22 : 13 ; 8 : 12 ; (2) separa- 
 tion from the society of all the good, Matt. 8: 11,12; 22: 13; Luke 
 16: 23, 26; (3) exclusion from heavenly light, rest, and happiness, 
 Matt. 8:12; 22 : 13 ; 25 : 30 ; 2 Thess. 1 : 6, 8, 9 ; (4) entire denial of 
 pity, divine as well as human, Prov. 1 : 26 ; Ps. 52 : 6, 7 ; 58 : 10 ; 
 Luke 16: 24, 25 ; (5) despair of every kind, Rev. 6 : 16, 17. Of the 
 positive, some are internal, and others external. The internal are those 
 which the damned experience within themselves, viz., the inexplicable 
 pains and tortures of soul, Ps. 18 : 4, 5 ; Is. 66 : 24 ; Mark 9 : 44, 46, 
 48." (Holl. (982) : " Tfyeir intellect will recognize God as the most 
 just judge and the most severe avenger of sins, Ps. 139 : 7 ; 2 Thess. 
 1:9; Wis. 5 : 3. Their will will be tortured by hatred to God, the 
 greatest sorrow, and raging impatience.") "The external are those 
 most sorrowful evils, outside of themselves, that they deeply feel, 
 namely, association with devils, Matt. 25 : 41 ; a most foul dwelling- 
 place, Matt. 25 : 30 ; and most painful burning without being con- 
 sumed, Luke 16: 23, 24; Rev. 14: 10, 11; 20: 10." Holl. (983) 
 answers the question concerning the nature of the fire : " The bodies of 
 the damned will be tortured in infernal fire, properly so called, and, 
 therefore, material. For the sentence of the judge announces a fire, 
 Matt. 25 : 41, from which smoke ascends, Rev. 14: 10, whose flames 
 burn, Luke 16: 24. That, therefore, to which the Holy Ghost has 
 ascribed the name, the properties, and the effects of true fire, is not 
 metaphorical, but fire properly so called. But to the infernal fire, etc. 
 Therefore But this will not be the element of fire, but that which is al- 
 together peculiar. Ordinary fire burns only bodies ; the infernal fire 
 will act also upon souls. The former ceases when fuel fails; the latter- 
 does not stand in need of nourishment properly so called. But to desire 
 to explain the nature of infernal fire more explicitly, is a matter of 
 curiosity rather than of profit." 
 
GRADES OF HAPPINESS IN HEAVEN. 661 
 
 [5] Quen. (I, 564): (A property of these evils is) "eternal contin- 
 uance, which will augment the punishments of the damned, beyond any 
 measure. The sufferings will be continuous, i. e., they will have no in- 
 terval, no interruption ; they will be eternal, they will have no end, Is. 
 34: 10; 66: 24: Rev. 14: 11 ; 20: 10; Dan. 12: 2; Matt. 3 : 12 ; 
 Luke 3 : 17." Of the time in which the sufferings will begin, Holl.: 
 " The tortures of hell will befall the souls of the damned, as soon as 
 they have departed from the body. Luke 16." 
 
 [6] Hfrffr. (695): "Life eternal is the ineffable, greatest, and 
 purest happiness, which believers, when their glorious and spiritual 
 bodies have been received, being freed from every sin and bodily infir- 
 mity, will, with the holy and blessed angels, eternally enjoy God him- 
 self, without end, satiety or disturbance. This felicity is called, and is 
 life eternal." 
 
 Grh. (XX, 340) : " What life eternal is can be known, from the 
 revelation of the Word, in a general and obscure (alviy/iaTiK(bg) manner, 
 viz., that it is the most blessed and felicitous state of the godly, into 
 which being transferred after this life, they will see God face to face, 
 and, free from every trouble, will live and reign in eternal joy and 
 glory, and in ineffable felicity ; but, in the infirmity of this life, this can- 
 not be known specifically and exactly, because ' eye hath not seen, nor 
 ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which 
 God hath prepared for them that love him,' Is. 64 : 4 ; 1 Cor. 2 : 9." 
 Synonymous expressions with eternal life are : simply life, Ezek. 18 : 
 9 ; Matt. 7 : 14 ; 18 : 8 ; the kingdom of heaven, Matt. 5 : 20 ; 7 : 21 ; 
 the kingdom prepared from the foundation of the world, Matt. 25 : 34 ; 
 an inheritance, Acts 20 : 32 ; Gal. 3 : 18 ; Eph. 1 : 14; the joy of the 
 godly, John 16: 22. Quen. (I, 551) : "That this life exists, is evi- 
 dent from Job 19 : 25 ; Ps. 16 : 5, 6, 9, 11 ; 17 : 15 ; 36 : 9 ; Is. 65 : 
 17, 18 ; Dan. 12 : 2, 3 ; Matt, 25 : 46 ; John 5 : 29 ; 10 : 28." 
 
 [7] Grades of happiness, therefore, are assumed; but what one en- 
 joys, in addition to that enjoyed by others, is described as something ac- 
 cessory, while all alike share in essentially the same salvation. Comp. 
 Ap. Conf. Ill, 234. Quen. (I, 559): " As to accessory rewards, the 
 harmonizing belief of the Orthodox Church is, that in life eternal there 
 will be degrees of not essential but of accidental glory. Moreover, bless- 
 edness can be considered in a two-fold manner, (1) with respect to its 
 essence, which consists in the clear and intuitive knowledge of God, 
 and thus there is no doubt that it belongs to all the blessed equally ; (2) 
 with respect to its accidents, in view of which the blessed are not alto- 
 gether equal, and thus, while there will be the same essential blessed- 
 
662 THE LAST THINGS. 
 
 ness to all, there will be nevertheless, some difference in accidental 
 endowments. . . . But there will be some difference and inequality 
 among the blessed, not only with respect to the brilliancy and splendor 
 of their bodies, but also with respect to their position (sessio) and other 
 accessory rewards. For, in life eternal, in addition to essential bles- 
 sedness, upon some saints there will be conferred various ornaments of 
 soul and body, Dan. 12:2; 1 Cor. 15 : 41, 42." But : " The cause of 
 this inequality must be sought, not in human merits, but in the most 
 free distribution and the gratuitous promise of divine kindness." 
 
 [8] Holl. (456): " Our eternal and highest blessedness consists in 
 the perfect sight and enjoyment of God. The former is an operation of 
 the intellect, the latter of the will ; by the former we obtain possession 
 of God as the highest good ; by the latter we perfectly enjoy and repose 
 in the same. The beatific sight of God is an act of the intellect illu- 
 mined with the light of glory, by which it perceives God clearly and 
 immediately, and as he is in himself. The enjoyment of God is an act 
 of the will, by which the blessed, in the heavenly country, most eagerly 
 embrace God as the highest good, most delightfully comprehend him, 
 and are most fully satisfied with the same, Ps. 17 : 15. Inseparably 
 accompanying the beatific sight and enjoyment of God, will be the most 
 ardent love to God, the most complete joy (Matt. 25 : 23; Ps. 16 : 11), 
 the eternal celebration of the divine name, Rev. 4 : 8, avajuaprvala, or 
 immunity from the danger of sinning, and the most constant holiness, 
 Eph. 5 : 27 ; Rev. 19 : 4." 
 
 Quen. (I, 553) : " The form" (of life eternal) " consists, generally 
 speaking, in the ineffable, most full, and never-ending reception of in- 
 comprehensible blessings. The blessings of life eternal are either pri- 
 vative or positive. The privative blessings are the absence of sin and of 
 the causes of sin, viz., the flesh inciting, the devil suggesting, the world 
 seducing, and of the punishments of sin, snch as various calamities, Ps. 
 116 : 7-9 : Is. 25 : 8 ; 49 : 10; Rev. 21 : 4 ; temporal death, Is. 25 : 8 ; 
 Hos. 13:14; 1 Cor. 15 : 26 ; Rev. 2:7; 21 : 4 ; eternal death, Hos. 
 13 : 14 ; 1 Cor. 15 : 26 ; Rev. 2 : 11; 20: 14. Here also belongs im- 
 munity from the affections and actions of the animal body as such ; 
 such are hunger, thirst, eating, drinking, the use of marriage, etc., Rev. 
 7:16; 1 Cor. 6 : 13 ; Matt. 22 : 30 ; 1 Cor. 15 : 42, 43. Some of the 
 positive blessings of life eternal are internal, others are external. The 
 internal blessings belong to the entire composite being, and affect both body 
 and soul of the blessed, among which the beatific and immediate sight 
 of God is prominent. The internal blessings of either part of the compo- 
 site being, belong either to the soul or body. Those of the soul are, (1) 
 
MUTUAL RECOGNITION IN HEAVEN. 663 
 
 the perfect enlightenment of the intellect, 1 Cor. 13 : 9, 10; (2) com- 
 plete rectitude of the will and appetite, Ps. 17 : 15 ; Eph. 4 : 24 ; 5 : 27; 
 (3) the highest security concerning the perpetual duration of this bless- 
 edness, John 16 : 22. Those of the body are, (1) Spirituality. 1 Cor. 
 15 : 44, 47; Matt. 22 : 30 ; Luke 20 : 36 ; Phil. 3: 21 ; (2) Invisibility, 
 1 Cor. 15: 44; (3) Impalpability, 1 Cor. 15:44, 47; (4) Illocality 
 (ib.) ; (5) Subtilty (ib.) ; (6) Agility, 1 Thess. 4: 17 : 1 Cor. 15 : 44; 
 (7) Impassibility, Key. 7 : 16 ; 21 : 4 ; (8) Immortality and incorruptibil- 
 ity, 1 Cor. 15 : 42-48, 53 ; 2 Cor, 5:4; Rev. 21:4; (9) Strength and 
 soundness, 1 Cor. 15: 43; (10) Brilliancy, Dan. 12 : 3 ; Matt. 13: 43; 
 1 Cor. 15 : 41, 43 ; (11) Beauty, 1 Cor. 15 : 43 ; Phil. 3 : 21. The ex- 
 ternal blessings are those which the blessed experience deeply outside 
 of themselves. Of these, two are chief; the most delightful intercourse 
 with God (Luke 23 : 43 ; John 12 : 26 ; 14: 3; 17: 24; 2 Cor. 5:8; 
 Phil. 1:23; 1 Thess. 4:17; Rev. 14: 4; 21: 3), and the angels 
 (Heb. 12:22), and all the blessed (Matt, 8: 11; Luke 13: 28, 29; 
 Heb. 12 : 23), consisting in mutual presence and most agreeable conver- 
 sations, and rendering of mutual honor joined with mutual love; and a 
 most beautiful and magnificent abode." 
 
 Two other questions here naturally follow : " (1) Whether the saints, 
 therefore, will recognize each other in the life to come? (2) Whether 
 the joy of life eternal will be clouded by the fact that the blessed will see 
 many of their most intimate friends tortured in hell ?" The first ques- 
 tion, Hfeffe. answers (699): " Certainly. Because the perfect image 
 of God in which we had been created being restored, we will be en- 
 dowed also with perfect wisdom and knowledge. Hence, if Adam, be- 
 fore the fall, immediately recognized his rib as Eve, much more, in the 
 life to come, when all these gifts will be far more perfect, we will recog- 
 nize each other, Luke 16: 23; Matt. 17: 1." The second, Hutt. 
 (Comp. Th., 318) as follows : " Not at all, for the will of the blessed shall 
 in all things concur with that of God. Such carnal affections, which are 
 the sign of our weakness in this life, will entirely cease in the life to 
 come, when our love will extend only to those who are beloved of God, 
 and whom he has made heirs of everlasting life. But in the damned, 
 they will supremely admire and eternally praise the exalted justice of 
 God." 
 
 [Geh. (XIX, 498): "God loved the human race far more ardently 
 than in this life any parent can love his own son, because he gave his 
 only begotten Son unto death for the world. Nevertheless his happiness 
 and joy are in no way disturbed by the sight of the damned, Prov. 
 1 : 26."] 
 
664 THE LAST THINGS. 
 
 [9] Grii. (XX, 341): "By the name Heaven, that certain place 
 (ttov) is to be understood, in which the blessed will see God, and per- 
 fectly enjoy the heavenly glory and pleasure, Matt. 5 : 12 ; 6: 20 ; Luke 
 6 : 23; 12: 33; 1 Pet. 1 : 4" 
 
 [On the practical use of this doctrine, Grh. (XX, 528): " The doc- 
 trine concerning the heaven of the blessed and eternal life is set forth 
 in Holy Scripture, not that we may idly dispute as theorists, concerning 
 the locality of Heaven, the beatific vision, the properties of glorified 
 bodies ; but that, as practical men, considering the promised joys of 
 eternal life every day, aye every hour, aye every moment, we may keep 
 closely to the way leading thither, and carefully avoid all that can cause 
 delay or recall us from entrance into life eternal. In 2 Cor. 4 : 18, the 
 godly are well described by the Apostle as looking not at ra fifa7r6ftei>a, 
 but at ra jurj PiEizofieva. One of the ancients, who was asked what books 
 he used in his daily studies, answered that he studied every day a book 
 with three pages, one red, one black, one white ; that on the red page 
 he read of our Lord's passion, on the black, the torments of the lost, on 
 the white, the joys of the glorified; and that from this study he derived 
 more profit, than if he were to ponder all the works of the philoso- 
 phers."] 
 
APPENDIX 
 
 i. 
 
 SKETCH OF THE DOGMATICIANS CITED. 
 
 • Philip Melanchthon, or Melanthon (often incorrectly 
 spelled Melancthon), born 1497 ; professor at Wittenberg, 1518 to 
 his death, 1560. The foundation of Lutheran Systematic Theology 
 was laid in his Loci Communes Rerum Theologicarum seu Hypo- 
 typoses Theologies (1521), which had its origin in a brief outline 
 prepared for his own private use, and afterwards dictated to his 
 students as an introduction to his lectures on the epistle to the 
 Eomans. During the author's life it passed through eighty edi- 
 tions, was greatly enlarged, and on certain points, as, for example, 
 the Freedom of the Will, its doctriDe was materially changed. 
 For details, the English reader is referred to the article Melanch- 
 thon, prepared by the author of this sketch, in McClintoch and 
 Strong's Cyclopedia, vol. vi. The collection of Melanchthon's 
 works in the Corpus Reformatorum affords the student the best 
 facility for the critical study of Melanchthon's theology. It 
 contains a reprint of each of the principal editions, as well as of 
 several translations of ihe^Loci. 
 
 Martin Chemnitz, born 1522, lecturer at Wittenberg, 1552- 
 1554, pastor at Brunswick, 1554-1567, Superintendent of Bruns- 
 wick, 1567-1586. Gerhard frequently refers to him as "the in- 
 comparable theologian ;" Quenstedt styles him, "without doubt 
 the prince of the theologians of the Augsburg Confession ;" and 
 Buddeus, "that great theologian of our Church, whom no one 
 will refuse to assign the chief place after Luther among the de- 
 fenders of the Gospel truth." His Loci Theologici (1591) is a com- 
 43 
 
Q6Q SKETCH OF THE DOGMATICIANS CITED. 
 
 mentary upon the Loci Communes of his teacher, Melanchthoo, 
 the outgrowth of theological lectures begun at Wittenberg, and 
 continued at Brunswick. It was published after his death, under 
 the editorship of Polycarp Lyser. His De Duabus Naturis (1570) 
 has been repeatedly called " an epoch-making production" 
 (Kahnis, Luthardt), while his two treatises on the Lord's Sup- 
 per, De Ccena Domini (1560) and Fundamenta Sanse Doctrinse, 
 are especially valuable for their thorough discussion of Scripture, 
 and their historical development of the subject. The Examen 
 Concilii Tridentini (1565-73) is the ablest defence of Protestant- 
 ism ever published. He also commenced the celebrated Har- 
 mony of the Gospels, and was one of the authors of the Formula 
 of Concord. Wealth of Scriptural learning, profoundness of rea- 
 soning, clearness and accuracy of statement, well-balanced judg- 
 ment, simplicity and freshness of style, a constantly practical 
 tendency, and devout feeling, are the prominent characteristics 
 of his works. For further details, see Evangelical Review, vol. 
 xxi, p. 410, seq. 
 
 Nicholas Selnecker, also a pupil of Melanchthon, and one 
 of the authors of the Formula of Concord, born 1532, professor 
 at Leipzig and Jena, repeatedly exiled, died 1592. His Institu- 
 tiones Christians Meligionis (1563) introduced the practice of 
 prefacing works on Systematic Theology with Prolegomena. In 
 addition, he prepared a compend of Melanchthon's Loci, and 
 wrote numerous monographs, De Ccena (1561), Exegema de 
 TJnione Personali (1571), etc. 
 
 Matthew Hafenreffek, born 1561, professor at Tubingen, 
 died 1619. His chief work, Loci Theologici, sive Compendium 
 Theologise, was especially esteemed in Wiirtemburg, Sweden, and 
 Denmark, where it was generally used as a text-book. 
 
 Leonard Hutter, born 1563, professor at Wittenberg from 
 1596 until his death, in 1616. His best known work is his Com- 
 pendium Locorum Theologicorum (1610), for nearly a century al- 
 most universally used as a text-book in the Church-schools of 
 Germany. It has been translated into German (three times), 
 Swedish, and English, and has formed the basis of at least seven 
 
SKETCH OF TEE DOGMATICIANS CITED. 667 
 
 commentaries. It is characterized by conciseness, precision, and 
 almost entire reliance npon the Symbolical Books and the older 
 theologians (Chemnitz, JEgidius Hunnius) for its definitions. 
 His posthumous work, Loci Communes Theoloyici (1619), edited 
 by the Wittenberg faculty, is a development of the Compendium, 
 or a commentary upon it. See Preface to English translation of 
 the Compendium for further details. 
 
 John Gerhard, the pupil of Hutter, born 1582, professor at 
 Jena from 1616, until his death, in 1637, a theologian "who 
 combined rare learning, great acuteness, wonderful industry, 
 sound judgment, and practical ability with ardent piety." 
 (Luthardt.) His great work, Loci Theologici, cum pro adstruenda 
 veritate, turn pro destruenda quorumvis contradicentium falsitate, 
 per theses nervose, solide et copiose explicate, was begun in 1610, 
 and completed in 1621. "A more careful exegetical treatment 
 than is found in his predecessors, the comprehensive considera- 
 tion of the material afforded by the history of dogmas, the most 
 thorough elaboration of every question, the objectiveness of its 
 judgment, and its firmness in polemics, combined with the ref- 
 erence to the practical and consolatory use of the individual 
 dogmas, distinguish this work, which also through its copious 
 application of the scholastic theology (especially in the doctrine 
 of God), and its employment, although still in a moderate de- 
 gree, of the scholastic form, was of the most significant influence 
 upon works which followed it." (Luthardt, Compendium, p. 42.) 
 " The strength of this work does not lie in the systematic arrange- 
 ment of the material, but in the thorough elaboration of the in- 
 dividual doctrines, according to the entire extent of their exeget- 
 ical, dogmatico-historical, symbolical, polemical, and practical 
 material. Yet it cannot be said that Gerhard produced epoch- 
 making dogmatic thoughts; he has rather learnedly, and with 
 great thoroughness, brought together what had been already 
 prepared." (Kahnis, Luth. Dogmatik, I, p. 29.) "Gerhard's ad- 
 vance bej^ond Chemnitz and Hutter consists not so much in a 
 more systematic arrangement, or in a deeper speculative basis for 
 his doctrines, or a more subtle formal development of them, as in 
 an erudite thoroughness, transparent clearness, and comprehen- 
 
668 SKETCH OF THE DOGMATICIANS CITED. 
 
 siveness." (Tholuck, in Herzog's Encyclopedia) "Some, in- 
 deed, accuse him of reintroducing scholastic theology into the 
 Church, as the treatment of his Loci Theologici is after the 
 scholastic mode ; yet the same persons must admit that he was 
 more cautious than those who followed him, and that he was 
 careful not to mingle philosophy with theology. . . . Those who 
 admire his industry, but, overlook his sound judgment, prove 
 thereby that they themselves are destitute of judgment, as I am 
 certain that they cannot produce a single example of an error in 
 judgment." (Buddeus, Lsagoge, p. 353.) " What work, among 
 those which fully treat of this department, is to be named above 
 all others, can as little be asked as what star surpasses all others 
 in brilliancy. As the only answer to the latter question must 
 be the sun, so the only answer to the former is the Loci Theo- 
 Jogici of John Gerhard. ... In our opinion, this work is the 
 most excellent and complete, both in contents and form, that 
 has been produced within this department of the Christian re- 
 ligion, and will remain until the last day the model for all who 
 make attempts in this sphere." (Prof. Walther.) Hence, too, 
 the high value set upon this work by theologians of other 
 churches. Passing by encomiums from the Reformed Churches, 
 we need only mention those coming from a direction the most 
 unlooked-for. The Roman Catholic Du Pin praises it as a work 
 of the greatest erudition, commends the chapters concerning God 
 and the Trinity as most worthy of the study of Catholic theo- 
 logians, styles its author a thorough linguist, a most diligent stu- 
 dent of the Scriptures and the Fathers, a fair disputant, "of all 
 the Protestants, shedding the greatest light upon the arguments 
 on which he touched," and concludes that "Bellarmine had no 
 adversary more to be dreaded than Gerhard." Bossuet is said to 
 be the author of the often-quoted remark that Gerhard is the 
 third (Luther, Chemnitz, Gerhard) in that series of Lutheran 
 theologians in which there is no fourth. The best edition of the 
 Loci is that of Cotta (Tubingen, 1762-87, 22 vols.), valuable for 
 its accurate text, the learned notes of the editor, and its ex- 
 haustive indices. A more accessible and less costly edition, 
 especially attractive because of its clear type and paper, is 
 that begun in 1863, by Schlawitz, Berlin, and completed in 
 
SKETCH OF THE DOGMATICIAXS CITED. 669 
 
 1875 by J. C. Hienriclis (Leipzig); it preserves the paging of 
 the Cotta edition on the margin. The Isagoge Locorum 
 Theologicorum of John Ernest Gerhard is a very full and 
 satisfactory compendium of his father's great work. The 
 Confessio Catholica, showing the harmony of the Lutheran 
 Church with the purer Church of all ages, and the Harmony of 
 the Gospels, begun by Chemnitz, continued by Lyser, and com- 
 pleted by Gerhard, also contain valuable material belonging to 
 the department of Dogmatics. 
 
 Caspar Brochmann, born 1585, professor at Copenhagen and 
 Bishop of Seeland, died 1682. The title of his principal work 
 is Universse Theologize Sy sterna (1633). An interesting copy of 
 this comparatively rare work, once the property of Erick Biork, 
 one of the most efficient pastors of the old Swedish churches on 
 the Delaware (pastor of the Christina Church, 1696-1714), is in 
 the library of the Theological Seminary at Philadelphia. 
 
 Abraham Calovius, born 1612, professor at Konigsberg and 
 TTittenberg, died 1686. The most voluminous of our theolo- 
 gians, distinguished by his wonderful industry, untiring zeal in 
 controversy, unyielding firmness and severity, vast and varied 
 learning, and critical power of the first rank. He represents the 
 strictest school of orthodoxy, and wrote on all departments of 
 theological science. His work in the department of Dogmatic 
 Theology is Systema Locorum Theologicorum (12 vols., 1655-77). 
 His Biblia lllustrata (1672-6) contains valuable Dogmatical 
 material. 
 
 John Frederick Koenig, born 1619, professor at Greifswald 
 and Eostock, died 1664. His compend of theology, Theologia 
 Positiva Acroamatica (1664) was widely used as a text-book. It 
 differs from Hutter's work, in being scientific rather than popu- 
 lar. " The author comprehended much in a few words and ner- 
 vously; but, by an excessive desire of brevity and accuracy, 
 produced a mere skeleton, destitute of all sap and blood." 
 (Buddeus, Isagoge, 359.) 
 
 John Adam Scherzer, born 1628, professor at Leipzig, died 
 
670 SKETCH OF THE DOGMATICIANS CITED. 
 
 1683, wrote a brief outline of theology, Breviculus Theologicus, 
 (1678), and afterwards a system, Sy sterna Theologize, xxix defini- 
 tionibus absolutum (1680). 
 
 John Andrew Quenstedt, born 1617, professor at Witten- 
 berg, died 1688, the nephew of John Gerhard. His Theologia 
 Didactico-Polemica (1685), because of its exhaustive collection and 
 its accurate classification of dogmatic material, is one of the most 
 important works of Lutheran theology. It possesses little origi- 
 nality and follows closely the outline of Koenig, but manifests the 
 greatest erudition in its citations of authorities, and skill in ren- 
 dering the work of reference easy. From this characteristic, its 
 author is often styled the " bookkeeper" of the Wittenberg Or- 
 thodoxy, and is conceded to be " next to Gerhard the most in- 
 structive representative of the Orthodox Dogmatik." [Luthardt.] 
 The objection, however, is often presented against Quenstedt, that 
 his excessive attention to the details of his system has deprived 
 Dogmatic theology of its life, by reducing its doctrines to the 
 shape of mathematical formulas. 
 
 John William Baier, born 1647, general superintendent of 
 Weimar and professor at Halle, died 1695. The Compendium 
 Theologise Positive (1685), is largely, as its title indicates, a com- 
 pend of the theology of Musaeus (Baier's father-in-law, born 
 1613, professor at Jena, died 1681), and " many other orthodox 
 theologians." An accurate acquaintance with the history of the 
 controversies of the preceding periods, is a necessary prerequisite 
 to the successful study of this much valued and widely received 
 text-book. Professor Walther, in his valuable series of articles 
 in the first volume of the Lehre und Wehre, entitled Luther isch- 
 Theologische Pfarrer's-Bibliothek, sums up the merits of this com- 
 pendium, as " great completeness combined with compact brevity, 
 exclusion of all extraneous material, exquisite selection, and, 
 above all, accurate exegesis of scriptural proof-passages, critical 
 comparison, and employment of the labors of his predecessors 
 within the department of dogmatics, and, in addition to Lutheran 
 fidelity in doctrine, the expression of a living heart faith, and 
 of a mild, pious sensibility." The most accessible edition is that 
 edited by Preuss, and published by Schlawitz, Berlin, 1864. Prof. 
 Walther has also published an edition with notes. 
 
SKETCH OF THE DOGMATICIANS CITED. 671 
 
 Frederick Bechmann, born 1628, professor at Jena, died 1703. 
 Annotationes uberiores in comp. Theo . L . Hutteri (1696); Theologia 
 Polemica (1702); Institutiones Theologicw (2d ed., 1706); Annota- 
 tiones on Dieterich's Institutiones Catecheticse (1707). 
 
 David Holla z, born 1646, pastor at Jacobshagen, rector at 
 Colberg, died 1713. His Examen Theologicum Acroamaticum 
 (.1707) recapitulates with great clearness and compactness the re- 
 sults attained by his predecessors, under the form of questions 
 and answers. It is " especially happy in its definitions," but in 
 addition to some of the faults of the scholasticism of Quenstedt, 
 it possesses already some of the characteristics of the succeeding 
 period. 
 
APPENDIX 
 
 II. 
 
 EXPLANATION 
 
 OF SOME SCHOLASTICO-DOGMATIC TERMS. 
 
 [Translated from Luthardt's Compendium der Dogmatik, p. 302, seq.] 
 
 Circumscriptiva prassentia, contrasted with definitiva praesentia, 
 or in Scholastic usage (Occam) dimnitiva (disfinere) : the former 
 used with reference to bodies, in so far as their single parts cor- 
 respond to the single parts of [occupied] space, and thus are lo- 
 cally limited; the latter, of spiritual existences (or pneumatic 
 bodies, such as the body of Christ in the Lord's Supper), in so 
 far as they stand in such a relation to a specific space that they 
 are entirely present at each point of it, as the soul in the body, 
 and angels at the respective places of their presence and activity. 
 
 Conor etum designates the unity of substance (subjectum) and 
 form (i. e., that distinction in view of which the substance is 
 designated). Thus the concretum person designates the person 
 together with its nature ; the concretum nature designates nature 
 viewed in its personal existence ; whilst the abstractum nature 
 designates nature viewed in itself, aside from personal existence, 
 as humanity, Deity, human nature, divine nature. 
 
 Connexa are such conceptions or objects as reciprocally neces- 
 sitate each other, so that they cannot be conceived of without 
 each other ; as, e. g., Creator and creature. Hence they are des- 
 ignated as related. 
 
 Connotata, are relative conceptions that imply others corres- 
 ponding to them (connotare, i. e., innuere or indigitare) : a father 
 implies a son ; a son implies a father. 
 
EXPLANATION OF SOME SCHOLASTICO-DOGMATIC TERMS. 673 
 
 Distinctio rationis rationantis signifies a purely subjective log- 
 ical distinction, not objectively founded upon the thing itself; 
 whilst distinctio rationis ratiocinate signifies a distinction that is, 
 indeed, only conceived, but conceived with a factual basis. Com- 
 pare the doctrine of the Divine Attributes. 
 
 Essentialiter. — A predicate is said to belong essentially to a 
 subject (or a substance) if the latter cannot, according to its na- 
 ture, at all exist or be conceived of without the former ; as, e. g., 
 man is essentially rational. A predicate is said to belong acci- 
 dentally to a subject, if the latter can be conceived of independ- 
 ently of the former; as, e. </., the accidental attributes of round- 
 ness, whiteness, etc. 
 
 Forma is the more specific definiteness that imparts to a sub- 
 ject, in itself indifferent, its characteristic peculiarity ; or it is 
 the conception of anything existing in a definite manner. Thus, 
 in the sphere of morals, actions in themselves indifferent receive 
 through the intention of the actor their forma, i. e., their specific 
 character of virtue or vice. In this sense Scholasticism speaks 
 of a fides formata caritate (a faith formed by love), or the Dog- 
 maticians say : Concurrit Deus ad materiale non ad formale pec- 
 cati (God concurs as to the matter, not as to the form, of sin). 
 The same mode of conception underlies the Aristotelian and 
 scholastic definition of the soul : Anima est forma corporis (Aris- 
 totle '. the SOUl 1S evreMx^i-a cufiarog bpyavinov, Or etdog au/uarog tyvctnov £,ut]v 
 
 exovrog, i. e., the specifying formal principle of organized matter). 
 Thus also, e. g., religion, considered materialiter, is conceived 
 of as religion taken as a whole; considered formaliter, it is con- 
 ceived of as specific religious knowledge or profession. Or, it is 
 said, also, Mary is the Mother of God, not formally, i. e., inas- 
 much as she did not bring forth God, as God according to his 
 Deity; but materially, inasmuch as she brought forth him who 
 is true God. 
 
 Habitndo designates, in contrast with existence or the thing 
 itself, the reference to, or capacity for, some other thing. Thus? 
 between God and man there is a relation [or correspondence] not 
 of entitas (for as to their existence they are infinitely different), 
 but of habitudo (for they have a reference to each other). 
 
 Habitus is the condition [or state of being] which includes in 
 
674 EXPLANATION OF SOME SCHOLASTICO-DOGMATIC TERMS. 
 
 itself at the same time a power to act. This habitus may be in- 
 fused (wrought by God), and thus is the condition [sine qua non] 
 of all corresponding activity ; or acquired, and then it is the re- 
 sult of actions already performed. Comp. habitual and actual 
 sin. 
 
 Qualitas is used either in a wider sense, for every attribute, or 
 in a narrower sense, to designate the essential peculiarities of 
 anything. 
 
 Relatio is the relation of one thing to another. Ens relativum 
 is, therefore, something that cannot be conceived of without 
 something else (e. g., master, like, etc.), as contrasted with ens 
 absolutum (e. g., man). 
 
 Subsistentia designates an independent existence (suppositum), 
 which carries the source of its activity within itself. When ap- 
 plied to a rational being (suppositum in the sense of person) it 
 designates, therefore, personality. Thus, e. #., every angel, man, 
 brute, etc., has its subsistentia, while the body and the soul, con- 
 sidered as separated from each other, have no subsistentia of their 
 own, and are not a suppositum, but only a pars suppositi. There- 
 fore, in the case of Grod, the immediatio suppositi (of his exist- 
 ence) i, e., his ad essentia ad creaturas substantialis [his substan- 
 tial nearness to creatures] is distinguished from the immediatio 
 virtutis, i. e. of his operatio [activity]. 
 
 Substantia completa is an existence that is not a part of a 
 whole, but constitutes a whole in itself (e. g., man, tree, etc.); 
 substantia in completa is a partial substance, which serves to com- 
 plete another (body, soul of man, while the angels are spiritus 
 completi). The substance needs subsistence to render it a sub- 
 stantia completa (therefore man becomes such only through per- 
 sonality), according to the well-known definition of Augustine 
 (De Trim, VII, 4, 9): Sicut ab eo quod est esse appellatur essen- 
 tia, ita ab eo quod est subsistere substantiam dicimus. (Just as 
 anything is called an essence from the fact of its existence, so 
 anything is called a substance from the fact of its subsistence.) 
 
INDEX. 
 
 Ability, human. 265 
 Absolution, is it a Sacrament? 528 
 Abstraction, 672 
 Accident, defined. 673 
 none in God. 141 
 Accommodation, of the Holy Spirit, in 
 
 inspiration, 58 
 Act, or action, divine, ad extra, 159, 167, 
 169 
 ad intra, 155 
 
 and action, contrasted, 156 
 Active and passive obedience of Christ, 
 350. 358, sq., 361 
 spiration of the Holy Ghost, 163 
 Acts, personal, 155 
 
 Actual sins, defined and classified, 258 
 Adam the representative of the human 
 race, 232 
 
 adris fy#Vf), 636 
 
 Adiaphora, 547 
 
 Administration of Sacraments, see Dis- 
 pensation 
 
 Advent, the second, 655 
 
 Aepin, on the descent to hell, 403 
 
 ayevvrjoia, 158 
 
 Adoration of the host, 577 
 
 Agnoetae. 395 
 
 ayopaaig, 375 
 
 adavaoia. 643 
 
 Alicubitas, of the angels, 211 
 
 Allegorical sense of Scripture, 89 
 
 a?J.oiu<Jic, of Zwingli, 333 
 of Cyril, 333 
 
 "Alone," the exclusive particle in doc- 
 trine of Justification, 445 
 
 Americans, "and other barbarians," 455 
 
 Anabaptists, condemned, 608 
 Chiliasm of. 652 
 
 Anagogical sense of Scripture, 89 
 
 Analogical attributes. 125 
 
 Analogy of faith, 80, 86 
 
 ava/.iotg, 630 
 
 avafiapTTjcia. of Christ, 302, 308 
 of the glorified, 662 
 
 Andrea? and Luke Osiander vs. Beza on 
 
 the Sacraments, 530 
 avepyr/Ta, attributes. 127 
 Angels, existence of, 207 
 
 relation of, to space, 211 
 
 when created, 202, 203, 207 
 
 described. 202, 206 
 
 are complete substances, 208 
 
 original state of, 204. 214 
 
 attributes of. 203, 209 
 
 orders of, 205, 220 
 
 power of, 213, 217, 218 
 
 knowledge of, 212 
 
 number of, 213 
 
 the good, 203, sq., 215 
 
 can they sin? 210, 214 
 not essentially holy, 215, 217 
 works of, 205, 218" 
 not to be adored, 205, 220 
 the evil, 204, 206 
 
 why they fell. 205, 214, 220 
 when they fell, 221 
 works of," 2 23 
 punishment of, 206, 221 
 knowledge and power of, 206, 
 222 
 guardian. 219 
 Annihilation of the world, 658 
 avofxla, its origin, 241 
 Anselm, on the atonement, 357 
 Antecedent articles of faith, 104. 108 
 
 benevolence of God, 286, 289, 290, 
 279 
 Anthropology. 225, sqq. 
 Antichrist, 649. 654 
 
 marks of, 650 
 avrldocig, 321. 333 
 
 Antilegomena of the Xew Testament, 100 
 avri/.vrpov, 363 
 Antinomian controversy, 520 
 Antitrinitarianism, sophistry of, 147 
 avv-oaraoia of the human nature of 
 
 Christ, 302, 307 
 atiopiojuoc, in church discipline, 614 
 a-xLoria, final, cause of reprobation, 299 
 
676 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 Apocryphal books, 90, 91, 93 
 
 why denied canonical authority, 98 
 anodoKijuaaia, 299 
 cnrodFoaia, 341 
 air68eoig, 630 
 
 a.7rohvTpucig. 353, 368, 3*75 
 Apostasy of our first parents, 244 
 Apostles, in how far inspired, 60 
 Apostles' Creed, sometimes called the 
 rule of faith, 105 
 
 no adequate basis of church orga- 
 nization, 105 
 airoTeXec[j.a, 343, sq., 509 
 Apotelesmatic intercommunication of 
 
 properties, 319, 322 
 Appeal from the inferior to the supreme 
 
 Judge, 72 
 Application of redemption, 413, seq. 
 Applying grace of the Holy Spirit, 415 
 Appropriation of divine attributes, 333 
 Aquinas on the Trinity, 145 
 Arius on the Trinity, 147 
 
 on the creation, 171 
 Ark of Noah, figure of the Church, 594 
 Arminian view of the mystical union, 491 
 
 of inspiration, 61 
 Arrhabo, 424 
 apcus, 388 
 
 Articles of faith, pure and mixed, 102, 
 105 
 
 fundamental and non-fundamental, 
 102, 106 
 
 primary and secondary, 103 
 
 not contrary to, but above reason, 45 
 
 antecedent, constituent, consequent, 
 104, 108 
 Ascension of Christ, 386 
 Assent, an element of faith, 420 
 Assurance of faith, 299 
 ara^ia, in concurrence, 193 
 adavacia of Christ, 309 
 Athanasius on the Trinity, 148 
 Atonement, infinite, 350, 357, 365 
 
 Anselm on the, 357 
 
 real object of, 367, sqq 
 
 personal object of, 369, sqq. 
 Attributes, of God, 125, sq. 
 
 of the Scriptures, 61 
 
 of angels, 203, 209 
 
 of a mediator, essential, 357 
 Augustine, on the Trinity, 148 
 
 on humiliation of Christ, 391 
 
 on angels, 207 
 
 on original sin, 257 
 
 on schism, 617 
 Auricular confession, 475 
 Authority of the Scriptures, 61, 94 
 
 external criteria of, 67 
 
 not dependent upon the Church, 78 
 
 of the Ministers of the Church, 608 
 
 Authority of the civil magistrate, 618 
 avdvKooTaTog, 307 
 avTapneoTaTog, 170 
 
 avTOTEXecTaroc, said of the Xoyog, 314 
 avx^fJ-ara, 393 
 ia, 643 
 
 Baptism, defined, 540, 542, 545 
 
 form of, 546, 556 
 
 validity of, 540 
 
 signification of, 546, 548 
 
 primary design of, 540, 549, 550, 557 
 
 Sacramental union in, 545 
 
 secondary design of, 541, 550, 557 
 
 by heretics is valid, 548 
 
 of adults, demands faith, 540 
 
 faith not essential to, 548, 550 
 
 of infants, 550, 551 
 
 of those regenerated by the word, 
 550 
 
 accompanying usages of, 547 
 
 of hypocrites, 550 
 
 effects of, 541, 549 
 
 material of, terrestrial, celestial, 543 
 
 necessity of, 541, 557 
 
 Holy Spirit present in, 550 
 
 in cases of emergency, 548, 534 
 
 should not be repeated, 541, 555, 
 seq., 557 
 
 efficacy of, in a corrupt Church, 599 
 
 and original sin, 257, 549 
 
 of John, 542 
 
 and Eucharist, benefits of compared, 
 582 
 
 of the unborn. 545 
 Baptized and unbaptized contrasted, 276 
 Baptismal grace, permanence of, 555 
 
 regeneration, 467, 549 
 Beget vs. create. 162, 172 
 Beatific vision of God, 206, 662 
 tf-ft and nfcy£ 172 
 
 fielriuoig, 334, 341 
 
 Benevolence. of God, general and special, 
 278, 279 
 
 universal, 280 
 
 sincere, and earnest. 280, 287 
 
 gratuitous and free, 280 
 
 ordinate, 281 
 
 efficacious, 280, 287 
 
 conditionate, 280 
 
 antecedent and consequent, 279 
 Bernard, on the obedience of Christ, 358 
 Besetting sins, 250 
 Blessedness, grades of, 661 
 Birth, new, see Regeneration 
 Bodily perfections of Christ, 309 
 
 presence, see Lord's Supper 
 Body, the human, relation to the soul, 
 174, 630 
 
INDEX. 
 
 67' 
 
 Body, affected by original sin, 254 
 
 psychical and spiritual, contrasted, 
 
 407, 643 
 glorified, qualities of, 643 
 and blood of Christ received by the 
 mouth, 568 
 Bonaventura, on the sacrifice of Christ, 
 368 
 on the articles of faith, 104 
 Brentz, on faith, 429 
 
 on the humiliation and exaltation of 
 
 Christ, 395 
 on the obedience of Christ, 366 
 Bread, of the Holy Supper, 563 
 Brunswick theologians, omnipresence, of 
 
 Christ, 340 
 Bucan, on the "right hand of God," 413 
 Burial of Christ, 385 
 
 Call, divine, see Vocation 
 
 to the ministry, see Ministry 
 Calixtus. on tradition, 78 
 inspiration, 57 
 Apostles' Creed, 104 
 on the articles of faith, 104 
 omnipresence of Christ, 340 
 Calvin, on the relation of election to an- 
 tecedent will, 295 
 foreknowledge and predestination, 
 
 297 
 predestination and the merits of 
 
 Christ, 298 
 communicatio idiomatum, 333 
 the two natures, 333 
 the descensus. 406 
 the twofold signification of the Sac- 
 raments, 537 
 Calvinists, on the sacrifice of Christ, 370 
 will of the sign and purpose, 288 
 election and predestination, 293 
 personal union, 323 
 communicatio idiomatum, 323, 329, 
 
 333 
 on the power of the Word, 511 
 Canon of Scripture, 90, 91, sq. 
 Canonical authority of the Scriptures, 
 73. 91, 92. 95, 63 
 internal and external criteria of, 96 
 belongs only to the original lan- 
 guages, 63, 74 
 Canonicity, marks of, 90 
 Carlstadt. on the ubiquity of the flesh in 
 
 Christ. 337 
 Catholicity of the Church, 585 
 Catholics, see Roman Catholics 
 Causative authority of the Scriptures, 73 
 Causes, first and second, defined, 192 
 Celestial material in the Sacraments, 
 531, 563 
 
 Ceremonial law, 515 
 
 Ceremonies, Church, 78 
 
 Cerinthus, 652 
 
 Chance, theories of, 196 
 
 Character, hypostatic, 149 
 
 Characteristics of the Father, ad extra, 
 
 160 
 XEtpodecia, in ordination, 612 
 Children born outside of the Church, 
 
 454 
 Chiliasm, 652 seq. 
 
 Choice, in the hberum arbitrium, 267 
 Christ, Mediator according to both na- 
 tures, 301, 345 
 divine and human nature of, as- 
 serted, 312, 314 
 proved, 341 
 
 Jesus, proved to be the Messiah, 300 
 peculiarities of his human nature, 
 
 307 seq. 
 his person, how constituted, 309, 
 
 314 
 complex, 314 
 
 forsaken of the Father, 400 
 our righteousness, 441 
 ascension of, 386 
 return to judgment, 655 
 Christianity, the true religion, 32, sq. 
 Church, in what sense visible and invis- 
 ible, 586, 595, seq. 
 true and false, 587, 599 
 indestructible, 592 
 not more ancient than the Scrip- 
 tures, 70 
 decides in matters of faith, 71 sq. 
 gives the call to the ministry, 607, 
 
 610, seq. 
 particular, 586, 598 
 collective and representative, 601, 
 
 603 
 militant and triumphant, 589 
 the congregation of saints, 589 
 marks of the true, 585, 587, 599, seq. 
 Roman Catholic theory of, 599, 601, 
 
 603 
 government of, 603 
 discipline of, 614, 616, 617 
 councils, how constituted, 602, 604, 
 
 606 
 authority of, 606 
 Church and state, 618 
 in a wider and narrower sense, 584, 
 
 seq., 594 
 Christ the only head of, 588 
 one and undivided, 590, 594 
 why called Catholic? 591 
 why called Apostolic? 591 
 why called universal? 593 
 Circumcision of Christ, 400 
 Circumscriptive presence defined, 672 
 
678 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 Civil government, 618 
 
 its rights and duties, 618 
 
 its relation to the Church, 618 
 
 righteousness, 273 
 Catna Domini, see Lord's Supper 
 Communicatio idiomatum, 319, 327, 566 
 
 genera of, 319 
 
 degrees of 329 
 
 based upon unity of person, 329, 330 
 
 Calvinists on the, 323, 329, 333 
 Communication of person, 312 
 
 of natures, 310, 316, 323 
 Communion of natures in Christ, 317 
 
 attributes of, 317 
 
 private, 584 
 Complete and incomplete substances, 674 
 Conception of Christ, 312, 384, 399 
 Concrete, term technically used, 325, 672 
 Concupiscence, 243, 252, 258 
 Concurrence, divine, defined, 180 
 
 objects of, 181, 192 
 
 general and special, 181 
 
 of God with second causes, 188, 191 
 in evil actions, 181, 193 
 in revelation, 54 
 Confession, 475 
 
 auricular, repudiated, 475 
 
 in what sense it has been used of 
 Lutheran confession, 475 
 Confessions, see Symbols 
 Confidence, an element of faith, 420 
 
 the principal part of faith, 422, 425 
 Confirmation, defined, 554 
 
 how to be employed, 554 
 
 not the completion of Baptism, 554 
 
 not the prerogative of bishops, 554 
 Conjugal relation, 622 
 Connexa, defined, 672 
 Connotata, defined, 672 
 Conscience, 115 
 
 Consecration, sacramental, 575 
 Consequent will of God, 289 
 Conservation, 179 
 
 of species and individuals, 186 
 Consensus, of the Fathers, 39 
 Constituent elements of Faith, 415 
 Consubstantiation rejected, 574 
 Consummation of the world, 657 
 Contingency in human actions, 188 
 Contrition, defined, 466 
 
 the beginning of conversion, 466 
 
 what is embraced in, 472 
 
 and attrition, 474 
 
 requisites and marks of, 474 
 Controversies, theological, how to de- 
 cide, 63, 73 
 Conversation (daily life) of Christ, 384, 
 
 400 
 Conversion, defined, 465 
 
 acts preceding, 465 
 
 Conversion, a divine act, 481, 482, 483 
 
 not irresistible, 466, 480 
 
 causes of, 466 
 
 only two, 484 
 
 gradual, 476 
 
 transitive and intransitive, 465, 479 
 
 man's attitude in, 477 
 
 begins in contrition, ends in faith, 
 466 
 
 in a wide sense, 470, 477 
 
 in a special sense, 471, 477 
 
 in a double sense, 471 
 
 man passive in the beginning of, 
 466,475, 477 
 
 alone through the divine Word and 
 the Holy Spirit, 467, 481, 483 
 
 universal, of the Jews, 651 
 
 of unregenerate and regenerate, 478 
 
 occurs not by constraint, but will- 
 ingly, 481 
 
 man can and should co-operate in, 
 482 
 
 of the Gentiles, 651 
 Co-operating grace, 476, 483 
 Co-operation, divine, see Concurrence 
 Corporeal presence, see Lord's Supper 
 Corporeal possession, by evil spirits, 223 
 Corruption, man's state of, 223. 239 
 Cotta contrasts Lutheran and Reformed 
 
 views of Christ's person, 336 
 Council, general and particular, 602 
 
 who can call it? 602 
 Cranmer, on the sacrifice of Christ, 366 
 Create, beget and make, contrasted, 172 
 Creation, the first outward work of God, 
 168 
 
 out of nothing, 168, 177, 171 
 
 mediate and immediate, 169 
 
 defined, 168, 178 
 
 impelling cause of, 169 
 
 instantaneous, 170 
 
 three steps of, 173 
 
 especially the work of God the 
 Father, 171 
 
 undivided work of the Trinity, 169 
 
 design of, 177, 178, 169 
 
 a Divine work, 168 
 
 order of, 168 ? 173 
 
 man's place in, 174 
 
 time of, 173 
 
 of man, 174 
 
 chief design of, 113 
 
 of angels, 202, 207 
 
 why not earlier ? 173 
 Creationism refuted, 176 
 Credere Deum, Deo, in Deum, 421 
 Creed, the Apostles', called the rule of 
 faith, 105 
 
 no adequate basis of organization, 
 105 
 
INDEX. 
 
 679 
 
 Cross (affliction), 503 
 Curable and incurable readers and hear- 
 ers, 74 
 Cyril, on the Trinity, 147 
 
 on the person of Christ, 333 
 
 Damascenus on hypostasis, 153 
 Damnation and eternal life, 657 
 Death, temporal, spiritual and eternal, 
 '626 
 
 literal, figurative, 628 
 
 eternal, 628, 658 
 
 spiritual, 629 
 
 of Christ, 385, 401 
 
 of the body, a consequence of sin, 
 246, 626 
 Decalogue, 517 
 Decrees of God, not absolute, 282, 298 
 
 immutable, 282 
 
 preceded by foreknowledge, 186, 
 298 
 
 ordinate, 282 
 
 relative, 297 
 Definitive presence defined, 566, 672 
 Degrees of happiness, 661 
 Deity of the Son, proved, 166 
 
 of the Holy Ghost, proved, 167 
 Demoniacal possession, 224 
 Demonstrative retrogression vs. Sophisti- 
 cal circle, 66 
 Depraved state of man, 243 
 Depravity, see Original Sin 
 Descensus Christi ad inferos, 385, 401, 658 
 
 when and why, 401, seq. 
 
 various views of, 402, 406 
 Determination, 181, 197 
 
 in human ability, 267 
 Devils, see Angels, evil 
 Dichotomy of human nature, 175 
 dcnaiovv, 433 
 dtaKvfiepvncFig, 183 
 
 mO^T, 229 
 
 616, importance of the particle, 392 
 dioiKvaig, 183 
 Direction, 181, 197 
 Discipline, see Church 
 Disciplines, theoretical and practical, 28 
 Dispensation (dome), sacramental, 534 
 Disiinctio rationis rationantis, 673 
 Distinction in the Godhead, 143, 155 
 Distribution [doctg), sacramental, 534 
 Divorce, sole ground of, 623 
 
 diverse views concerning, 624 
 
 partial, 625 
 Domestic estate, 621 
 Dominion of man before the fail, 236 
 Donatistic views of the Church, 601 
 Donum superadditum, 238 
 dogaoig 341, 391 
 
 Double sense of Scripture denied, 88 
 dvvajutc, 269 
 
 Ecclesiastical estate, see Ministry 
 Ecstasy, 460, 633 
 Education of Christ, 384 
 Efficacy of the divine Word, 90, 505 
 
 of the Sacraments, 537 
 Endvatg, 630 
 
 E/i&TTWGlC. 334 
 
 Elect, the attributes of, 282 
 
 cannot fail of final salvation, 282 
 to be found in the visible Church, 596 
 
 Election, defined, 281 
 attributes of, 282 
 based upon TtpoOecuc and Trpoyvucig, 
 
 282, 296 
 causes of, 294 
 how faith enters into, 294 
 personal assurance of, 299 
 based upon the consequent will of 
 God, 295 
 
 Elements, see Lord's Supper 
 
 e/iiyxoc, 458 
 
 EfMTvevaie, 631 
 
 hva/Jiayr) nai Koivwvia bvo/Ltarav, of Theo- 
 doret, 333 
 
 hvavdpu-noLC and EvaufiaTooi.e, 310 
 
 End of the world. 657 
 
 evepyeia. of faith, 445 
 
 kvEpyrjjiara, 343, 509 
 
 Evdpovcfffidc, 391 
 
 kvaapKuaiCj 310 
 
 evteXexelo., 673 
 
 EvrvyxavElv, 373 
 
 EWTTOOTaaia, 302, 307 
 
 ETravaxupnag, 630 
 
 Epicurean view of Providence, 196 
 
 Equality of persons in the Godhead, 143 
 
 Equivocal attributes, 125 
 
 Essence, divine, distinguished from per- 
 son, 165 
 one and undivided, 151 
 of God' (quid sit Deus), 120, 124 
 
 Essentialiter , term defined, 673 
 
 Estates of Christ, 382, sqq. 
 three in the Church, 606 
 contrasted, 607 
 
 Eternal generation of the Son, 161, seq. 
 
 Eternal Life and Death, 657 
 
 ETspovaiac, 159, 305 
 
 Eucharist, see Lord's Supper 
 
 EVKpaala, 309 
 
 Eutychian errors, person of Christ, 305 
 
 kZayopaaig, 375 
 
 Exaltation of Christ, 391, 394 
 
 Exclusive particles, doctrine of, 442 
 
 Excommunication, greater and less, pub- 
 lic and private, 614 
 
680 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 h^ofioloynaig, 475 
 
 Ex opere operato, in "Sacraments" de- 
 nied, 535, 551 
 
 Exinanition (humiliation, self-renuncia- 
 tion), 387 
 
 Exorcism, 547 
 
 Expiatory intercession of Christ, 374 
 
 Explicit faith, 417 
 
 Extra ecclesiam nulla salus, 585, 592, 599 
 
 Faith, essentia], constituent elements of, 
 417, 421 
 a work of God in man, 418, 427, 429 
 subjective and objective, 419 
 assent, the second act of, 420 
 antecedent, constituent and conse- 
 quent articles of, 104, 108 
 knowledge, the first part of, 420 
 articles of, pure and mixed, 102, 
 
 105 
 explicit, 421 
 
 threefold foundation of, 107 
 implicit, 421 
 
 justifying, 416, 426, seq., 442 
 instrumental cause of, 427 
 direct, reflex and discursive, 427 
 receptive and operative, 429 
 explicit, implicit and informal, 417, 
 
 421 
 weak or infirm, 430 
 an element of repentance, 473 
 articles of, fundamental and non- 
 fundamental, 102, 106 
 general, special, saving, 421, 425 
 sole condition of justification, 426 
 not essential to the integrity of a 
 
 Sacrament, 537, 578 
 essential to the appropriation of the 
 blessing of a Sacrament, 537, 548, 
 578 
 false or dead, true or living, 418, 
 
 428 
 concomitants and consequences of, 
 
 429, 432 
 assurance of, 299 
 of infants, 552, sqq. 
 as related to election, 296 
 confidence, the principal part of, 
 
 422, 425 
 analogy of, 80, 86 
 Family, the Christian, 621 
 Fate, stoical, astrological, Christian, 196 
 Fathers, testimony of, 39, 61, seq., 86, 95 
 Feeling, no criterion of the presence of 
 
 the Spirit, 506 
 Feuerborn, on the Humiliation of Christ, 
 
 397 
 Fides and fiducia, 422 
 Figurative sense of Scripture, 88 
 
 Filiation of the Son, 162 
 Final judgment, 644 
 I Fire, infernal, 660 
 
 Flacius, on the relation of reason to rev- 
 elation, 42 
 
 substance of man, 231 
 
 original sin, 255 
 
 obedience of Christ, 360 
 
 regeneration, 468 
 
 Church government, 604 
 Forties, the tinder of sin, 257, 549 
 Foreknowledge, divine, 285 
 
 no act of the will, 285 
 
 prior to the divine purpose, 283 
 
 basis of the divine, 185 
 
 not dependent upon any divine de- 
 cree, 285 
 
 the basis of predestination, 297 
 Forensic nature of justification, 430 
 Forma, term defined, 673 
 Fortune, 196 
 
 Foundation of the faith, threefold, 106 
 Fraternal redemption, 300, seq. 
 Free will, 267 
 
 in spiritual things, 269 
 
 in external things, 272 
 
 before the fall, 275 
 
 since the fall, 265, 270 
 
 in the regenerate, 276 
 Fundamental doctrines, 102, 104, sq. 
 
 primary and secondary, constitutive 
 and conservative, 103 
 
 antecedent, constituent, consequent 
 articles of faith, 106 
 
 Gallus, can laity administer the Lord's 
 Supper? 580 
 
 ^frO' 375 ' 300 
 
 _ T 
 
 General and special assent, in faith, 421 
 General intercession of Christ, 351 
 Generation of the Son, eternal, active, 
 passive, 161, sq. 
 
 eternal not temporal, 161 
 
 passive, 162 
 
 twofold in Christ, 305 
 Gentiles, conversion of, 651 
 Genus, apotelesmatic, 322 
 
 idiomatic, 319 
 
 majestatic, 321 
 Giessen Dogmaticians vs. those of Tu- 
 bingen, 397 
 Glorification of Christ, 391 
 Glorifying grace, 416 
 yvuoig, 43 
 God, existence of, 120, 121, sq. 
 
 can he be defined? 121, seq. 
 
 what is he? 121 
 
 names of, 121, sq. 
 
INDEX, 
 
 681 
 
 God, attributes of, 126, seq. 
 
 ascertained in a threefold way, 
 
 126, 131 
 negative, 127 
 positive, 128 
 are not accidents, 130 
 distinguished from divine es- 
 sence, 131 
 variously classified, 133 
 analogical, not univocal or 
 equivocal, 125 
 natural and supernatural know- 
 ledge of 113 
 image of, in man, 226, 228, sqq. 
 right hand of, 409 
 not the author of sin, 239 
 God's right hand, 409 
 Goel, 300 
 
 Gog and Magog, 753 
 Good works, no ground for justification, 
 
 443 
 Gospel and Law, 513 
 Government, divine, defined, 181, 195 
 of the Church, 609 
 civil, 618 
 Grace, prevenient, operative, co-opera- 
 ' tive, 476, 483 
 illustrated in Augustine, 483 
 of the Holy Spirit, in applying re- 
 demption, 414, 483 
 assisting and indwelling, 776 
 loss of, 299, 470, 555 
 of God, universal, 286 
 Grades of happiness in heaven, 661 
 Gratis, the exclusive particle in justifi- 
 cation, 365, 432, 444 
 Gregory, of Xyssa, on satisfaction of 
 
 Christ, 257 
 Guardian angels, 219 
 Guilt, 242 
 
 Guilt of original sin, 248, 257 
 Guilty of crime and deserving of punish- 
 ment, 242, 246 
 
 Habitudo, habitus, defined, 673 [Defini- 
 tion by Melancthhon : " Habitus, a 
 quality attained from frequent actions 
 in men."] 
 
 Happiness, grades of, 661 
 
 Hardening of the heart, judicial, 263 
 
 Heathen, judgment of, 454 
 
 Heaven, see Life Eternal 
 
 Heidegger, on the " Right hand of God,'' 
 413 
 
 Hell, 404, seq., 628, 636, 658 
 what and where it is, 659 
 
 Helmstadt theologians, 340, 484 
 
 Heresy, defined, 615 
 
 Heretics, baptism by, 548 
 44 
 
 Hesshuss, on lay administration of the 
 
 Lord's Supper, 580 
 Hilary, on the nature of God, 122 
 Hindrance, 181, 197 
 Historical Faith, 417 
 Hoc est corpus meum, 575 
 Hoffman, Daniel, on relation of philos- 
 ophy to Theology, 42 
 Holiness, see Renovation, Sanctification 
 
 of primeval man, 233 
 Holy Spirit, see Trinity 
 
 in the incarnation, 311 
 
 hypostatic character of, 163 
 
 witness of, 66 
 
 spiration (procession) of, 
 
 applying grace of, 415 
 Homologoumena, 100 
 Host, adoration of, 577 
 
 pH.Vrf' 433 
 
 Huber, on predestination, 293 
 
 Hulseman, on the Means of Grace, 512 
 
 on the articles of faith, 108 
 Human ability, 265 
 Human nature not threefold ? 175 
 
 of Christ, 307, seq. 
 Humiliation of Christ, 387 
 Hunnius, on the articles of faith, 109 
 Hypostatic presence of the loyog, 565 
 Hypostasis, distinguished from person, 
 
 154 
 Hypostatic union in Christ 303, 313 
 
 plurality in unity, 152 
 l&n (?ioyl{e<jdai), 249 
 
 Idiomatic intercommunication of prop- 
 erties, 319 
 
 I6i07v6irjacc or olneioais, 321 
 
 l6io7volta Kat IdtoTol^aig of Cyril, 393 
 
 Idiojua, 320, 328 
 
 iAau/^dc, I'kaaTTjpLov, 353, 368 
 
 Illocalitas, of the angels, 203, 211 
 
 Illumination, 415 
 defined, 456 
 gradual, 457, 460, 462 
 external and internal, 457, 458 
 legal and evangelical, 457, 461 
 literal and pedagogical, 457, 462 
 spiritual and completely saving, 463 
 objective, effective, 458 
 influence of, upon intellect and will, 
 459 
 
 Image of God, in man, 226, 231, 235 
 accidental, substantial, 231, 237 
 viewed fieptnug, oMKCjg, 235 
 natural perfections of, 226, 237 
 loss of, 246 
 
 Immanence, immeatio (Treptxapr/occ), 159, 
 304, 323, 489 
 
682 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 Immediatio suppositi et virtutis, 192 
 Immersion, 546, 556 
 Immortality of the soul, 631, 632 
 of primeval man, 236 
 theoretical arguments for, 633 
 historical arguments for, 634 
 Impanation, rejected, 574 
 Impartation of natures in Christ, 334 
 Impeccability of the good angels, 216 
 Imperfection of the renewal, 491, 494 
 Impersonality of Christ's human nature, 
 
 307 
 Implicit faith, 417 
 Impulse, divine, in inspiration, 55 
 Impulsive internal and external cause of 
 
 justification, 440 
 Imputation of Adam's sin, 247 
 mediate and immediate, 
 of Christ's righteousness, 431, 435, 
 437, 439, 443 
 Inability, human, in spiritual things, 265 
 Incarnation defined, 310, 387 
 
 common to the entire Trinity, 310 
 mode of, 310 
 Independence of God, 125 
 Individual, defined, 304 
 Induration, 263 
 Indwelling sin, 250 
 
 grace, 476 
 Infallible truthfulness of Scripture, 65 
 Infants, regeneration of, 551, 553 
 baptism of, 551 
 faith of, 552, seq. 
 Innate knowledge, 115, 116, sq., 39 
 Infirmities of man, natural and personal, 
 
 306 
 Influence of second causes, 187 
 Inherent original sin, 253 
 Innocence, man's original state of, 228 
 Inspiration, real and verbal, 50, 54, 55 
 Arminian view of, 61 
 in historical matters minute, 56 
 of the vowels of the Hebrew text, 59 
 and revelation contrasted, 59 
 internal and external criteria of, 65, 
 seq., 62, 66, sq. 
 Inspired books, have any perished? 75 
 Integrity, man's state of, 225, 230 
 
 of the Scriptures, 64 
 Intellect, as affected by Original Sin, 25 
 Intention, in the Sacraments, 535, 548 
 Intercession of Christ, true, real, literal, 
 351,373 
 expiatory, 374 
 eternal, 374 
 of the Holy Spirit, 374 
 of saints, 637 
 of angels, 219 
 Intercommunication of properties, 331 
 Intermediate state, no, 627 
 
 Internal testimony of the Holy Spirit, 66, 
 
 96 
 Interpretation, right, of the Scriptures, 
 
 63, 85 
 Intuitu fidei, 295 
 Invocation of angels, 219 
 loayyeAoi, 643 
 
 Jachtaufe, 534 
 
 Jena theologians on the Sacraments, 
 
 532 
 Jerome on foreknowledge, 185 
 II IM., essentiator, 150 
 Jesuits on justification, 439 
 Jews, conversion of, 651 
 Judas, betrayal by, in what sense neces- 
 sary, 191 
 Judge of controversies, the Scriptures 
 alone, 71, 73 
 
 the principal, instrumental, inferior, 
 72 
 Judgment, final, 628, 644 
 
 general, 645, 656 
 
 particular, 646 
 
 private, in matters of faith, 63 
 
 office of angels at, 218 
 
 signs preceding the, 647, 651 
 
 of examination and retribution, 655 
 Justification, defined, 430, 434 
 
 a forensic or judicial act, 430, 432, 
 434 
 
 twofold effect of, 434, 435 
 
 and sanctification confounded by 
 the Romanists, 441 
 
 only ground of, 439 
 
 by faith " alone," 445 
 
 without our merit, 444, seq. 
 
 precedes good works, 443 
 
 effects and properties of, 446 
 
 a free gift of God, 444 
 Justifying faith, 418, 442 
 
 concomitants and consequences of, 
 447, seq. 
 
 Kadaipecng, in Church discipline, 614 
 
 KaraXkayrj, 353 
 
 Karakvoiq, 630 
 
 nevGHJtg, 334, 388, 396 
 
 Keys, held by the Church, 615 
 
 Kingly office of Christ, 376 
 
 Kingdom of Christ, 376, 379 
 
 of power, grace and glory, 376 
 
 eternal, 381 
 Knowledge, explicit, an element of faith, 
 417 
 
 of God, saving, 120 
 
 natural (objective), of God, imper- 
 fect. 118 
 
INDEX. 
 
 683 
 
 Kuowkdge of primeval man, 119, 232 
 
 of God. subjective, 135 
 
 naturally implanted, 42, 116 
 
 supernatural, 120 
 Koivovia, of the two natures in Christ, 
 315 
 
 a term for the Lord's Supper, 563 
 KOLvuvia ruv deitiv, 321 
 Kpvipig, 388, 396 
 
 KTIOTTJS, 183 
 
 Laity, to partake of the cup, in the 
 Lord's Supper, 575 
 can administer the Lord's Supper, 
 580 
 H/.tiv in 2 Pet. 1 : 21, 57 
 Last day, 628, 644 
 signs of, 647, 651 
 things, 626, 632, seq. 
 Lay baptism, 548, 534 
 Lay delegates, qualifications of, 604 
 Laymen, to take part in Church coun- 
 cils, for, 604 
 deciding upon doctrines, 604 
 Law of God defined, 240, 515 
 
 ceremonial and forensic, 515 
 chief and subordinate, end of, 515 
 moral ; of nature ; sinaitic ; primor- 
 dial ; universal and perpetual ; 
 particular and temporary ; de- 
 monstrative ; didactic and peda- 
 gogical ; political, 513, seq. 
 fulfilled by Christ, 359 
 and Gospel contrasted, 512, seq., 
 
 518, 521 
 office of, in illumination, 461 
 in conversion, 473 
 weakness of, 518 
 in the members, 250 
 Leidener, on the "right hand of God," 
 
 412 
 /.■qipig fiopdrJQ 6oi'/.ov, 389 
 
 in the Lord's Supper, 533 
 Liberty of contradiction aDd of contra- 
 riety, 271 
 of the will, 265 
 of the unregenerate man, 274 
 Liberum arbitrium, 265 
 
 variously explained, 267 
 Life eternal, 661, 664 
 
 human controlled by Providence, 
 198 
 Limbus patrum, 627, 637 
 puerorum, 627, 637 
 Literal and figurative sense of Scripture, 
 
 88, 562 
 Lombardus, on the satisfaction of Christ, 
 
 357 
 Lord's Supper, defined, 558, 561, 562, 578 
 
 Lord's Supper, nature of, 559 
 
 mode of the Saviour's presence in, 
 
 565 
 primary design of, 559 
 secondary design of, 560, 580, 583 
 form of, 559 
 material of, terrestrial and celestial, 
 
 563 
 doctrine of, upon what founded, 
 
 560 
 as instituted, explained literally, 
 
 561 
 nature of the real presence in, 558 
 objections answered, 566, seq. 
 not transubstantiation, 559, 574 
 not consubstantiation, 574 
 differently understood by Lutherans 
 
 and Reformed, 573 
 may a layman administer it, 580 
 and Baptism contrasted, 582 
 benefits of, 581, seq. 
 should be administered in public, 
 
 584 
 is a temporary action, 578 
 Lutheran and Reformed views of the 
 
 person of Christ contrasted, 335 
 Ivrpov, 368 
 /I'-puaig, 353 
 
 Macrocosmos, microcosmos, 628 
 Magistrate, political, 618 
 
 authority of, derived from God, 618, 
 
 seq. 
 duties of, 618, 619 
 power of, 618, 620 
 Majestatic genus of communicatio idio- 
 
 matum, 319, 321 
 Man, his original condition, 174, 225, 
 275 
 why, when and how created, 174, 
 
 114, 225 
 his fall, 228, 250 
 primeval, wisdom of, 232 
 threefold nature ? 175 
 Manducation, spiritual, mode of, 569 
 not physical, 570 
 but hyperphysical, 571 
 oral, but not capernaitic, 571 
 sacramental, 569 
 Marriage relation, divinely appointed, 
 621, seq. 
 how constituted, G21 
 ecclesiastical sanction not essential 
 
 to, 622 
 can be sundered for only one cause, 
 621 
 Martyrs, resurrection of, 652 
 Mass, sometimes means the Holy Sup- 
 per, 
 
684 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 Materia coelestis, in the Sacraments, 530 
 Material of the Sacraments, terrestrial 
 and celestial, 563 
 
 of sin, 257 
 
 fire in hell, 660 
 Means of grace, Word and Sacraments, 
 414, 504 
 
 salvation, dorcm, 2,q7rTina, 506 
 Mediator, essential attributes of, 357 
 
 Christ the, according to both na- 
 tures, 341, seq. 
 Mediatorial office of Christ, 344 
 Melanchthon, on the Sacraments, 528 
 Mentzer on the obedience of Christ, 358 
 
 omnipresence of Christ, 397 
 
 on the humiliation of Christ, 397 
 Meissner on Faith and Predestination, 
 
 296 
 Mercy of God, not absolute. 354 
 Merit of Christ, 351, 372, 437 
 Messiah, Jesus the, 300 
 Meradooiq, iizTaik^iq deiag atjiag, fieroxv 
 
 delag dvvdjuecog, 341 
 MeTe/LiipvxoocHc,, 636 
 Millennarianism, 652 
 Millennium, 652 
 
 Ministry, ecclesiastical, the representa- 
 tive Church, 602 
 
 of divine appointment, 607, 608 
 
 mediate and immediate call to, 609 
 
 of evil spirits, 224 
 
 of good spirits, 218 
 Ministers, called and ordained by the 
 Church, 611 
 
 authority of, 613 
 
 can they remit sins? 615 
 
 things hostile to, 617 
 
 grades of, 611, 617 
 
 essential parity of, 638 
 Ifissa, the Sacrament of the altar in the 
 
 Latin Fathers, 563 
 Mission of the Son, 162 
 Mixed articles of faith, 48 
 Moempelgard colloquy, 530 
 Monothelete error, 306 
 Montanists on the marks of the Church, 
 
 601 
 Moral and natural law, 516 
 Mortal sins, 259, 261 
 poptpr) 8eov, 389 
 Muentzer, relation of the Spirit to the 
 
 Word, 506 
 Musseus on Faith, 446 
 
 on the Means of Grace, 512 
 Mysteries consistent with perspicuity of 
 
 Scripture, 80, 86 
 Mystery defined, 106, 144 
 Mystical sense of Scripture, 88 
 Mvorfipiov, 106 
 Mystical union, defined, 485, 487 
 
 Mystical union, preceded by regeneration 
 
 and justification, 486 
 special and general, 485 
 accompaniments and consequences 
 
 of, 487 
 not essential, 490 
 contrasted with the general union, 
 
 489 
 not substantial, 485, 488 
 not sacramental, 491 
 not personal, 486, 490 
 not figurative, 487 
 true and real, 486, 488 
 an inexplicable mystery, 485 
 not transubstantiation or consub- 
 
 stantiation, 490 
 Arminian view of, 491 
 Mystics and Quietists, concerning the 
 
 human body, 177 
 illumination, 460 
 relation of the Holy Spirit to the 
 
 Word, 460, 511 
 
 Names of God, 121, sq. 
 Nativity of Christ, 384, 400 
 Natural, variously used, 237 
 knowledge of God, 116 
 infirmities common to men, 306 
 Nature, defined, 304 
 
 and person distinguished, 304 
 
 of Christ, divine and human, 301, 
 
 304 
 of God, 122 
 Nazianzen, on the Trinity, 147 
 Necessity and contingency contrasted, 
 189 
 of consequence and of constraint, 
 
 189 
 and chance excluded from Provi- 
 dence, 190 
 Nestorius on the Person of Christ, 323 
 New birth, see Regeneration 
 Nicholai on the humiliation of Christ, 
 
 396 
 Normative authority of the Scriptures, 
 
 63, 71 
 Noth-taufe, 534, 548 
 JVovissimis, de, 626 
 
 JVuda adessentia, in the omnipresence of 
 Christ, 396 
 
 Oath upon the Symbolical Books, 112 
 Obedience of Christ, active and passive, 
 350 ; 358, 361 
 
 new, an effect of repentance, 474 
 
 Bernard on, 358 
 Office of Christ, threefold, 344 
 
INDEX. 
 
 685 
 
 Office of Christ, prophetic, 346 
 
 sacerdotal, 348 
 
 regal, 3*76 
 oliceiuciQ, 321 
 Old and New Testaments, how related, 
 
 92 
 6/j.ai6vtog, 151 
 Omnipresence of Christ, 338, 567 
 
 objections answered, 567 
 
 of the flesh of Christ, Dogmaticians 
 differ concerning it, 339 
 
 not absolute, but relative, 340 
 Omniscience of Christ, 340 
 6/ioLovGiog, 159, 151, 159 
 Sjuoovala, 159, 151,305 
 dfioiocic. avdp&TTOv, 289 
 Opera ad intra, ad extra, 142, 155, seq. 
 Operating grace, 476 
 Opus operatum in the Sacraments, 535 
 Oral manducation, 568 
 Order, of the persons in the Trinity, 159, 
 495 
 
 of operating in the Trinity, 157 
 
 threefold hierarchical, 606 
 Ordination, is it a Sacrament? 528, 611 
 
 why necessary, 607 
 
 performed by bishops or presbyters, 
 612 
 
 no Sacrament, 611, 612 
 
 Xetpo&ecia in, 612 
 
 not absolutely necessary, 613 
 Origen, on the satisfaction of Christ, 357 
 Original righteousness, 234, 252 
 
 condition of man, 237 
 
 sin, see Sin, 
 
 text of Scripture, the final resort in 
 controversies, 63, 74 
 Osiander, Andrew, on the office of 
 Christ, 366 
 
 obedience of Christ, 360, 366, 441 
 
 exaltation of Christ, 395 
 
 justification, 436 
 
 righteousness of Christ, 436 
 
 faith, 436 
 Luke, on the humiliation of Christ, 395 
 
 on the Sacraments, 530 
 Ottoman power, 653 
 ovaia, 151 
 ovaiudug, 160, 631 
 
 rn& frm 375 
 
 TravreTcoipia, 185 
 irappTjGia, 422 
 Papias, 652 
 
 Parabolical sense of Scripture, 88 
 Parity of the Ministry, 611 
 Parsimonius, on the obedience of Christ, 
 361 
 
 Particles, on hell, 404 
 
 exclusive, doctrine of, 442 
 izaca in 2 Tim. 3 : 16, 57 
 Passive obedience of Christ, 350 
 Passive spiration of the Holy Ghost, 163 
 Passion of Christ, 384, 400 
 Passivity in conversion, 466, 475, 477 
 Patristic designations, in communicatio 
 
 idiomatum, 333 
 Parental relation, 621 
 Patripassianism, 331 
 Pelagianism, 255, 251 
 Penitence, in a wide sense, 466 
 Perfection or sufficiency of the Scrip- 
 tures, 74, 75 
 
 sinless, unattainable in this life, 495 
 Perfections of God, 130 
 
 of man, principal, 227 
 
 less principal, 227 
 Treiroidncug, 422 
 irepixupnoic,, defined, 313 
 
 essential, 159 
 
 personal, 160, 161 
 
 mystical, 489 
 
 in the person of Christ, 304, 323 
 Permission in Providence, 196 
 Person, abstract and concrete, 672 
 
 contrasted with nature or essence, 
 672, 165 
 
 defined, 672 
 
 of Christ, Lutheran and Reformed 
 view of, contrasted, 335 
 
 of Christ, diverse views among Lu- 
 theran Dogmaticians, 339 
 Cyril on, 333 
 Persons in the Godhead, predicates of, 
 143 
 
 how distinguished, 155 
 
 plurality of, in the Godhead, 164 
 Personal peculiarities in the Godhead, 
 142, 157 
 
 of Christ's human nature, 307, 318 
 
 union in Christ, 301 
 
 Calvinists on the, 343 
 
 attributes of, 309 
 
 negative properties of, 316 
 
 object of the sacrifice of Christ, 369 
 
 properties, 158 
 Pespicuity of the Scriptures, 79, 80, seq. 
 
 proof of, 81 
 
 degrees of, 82 
 Peyrere on the creation, 174 
 Philosophy not opposed to Theology, 42 
 
 seq. 
 Photinians, on the knowledge of God, 
 117 
 
 personal union, 305 
 
 office of Christ, 355 
 Piety, essential to an interpreter of the 
 Scripture, 83 
 
686 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 Piscator, on the person of Christ, 333 
 resurrection of the martyrs, 652 
 obedience of Christ, 362 
 tc'lotiq and TZEiroidrjcLc;, 422 
 Plan of salvation, 415 
 TT/lacif, 631 
 
 Platonics controvered, 460 
 Plenary inspiration, 57 
 Trlrjpotyopia, 419, 422 
 
 Plurality of God, not of essence or acci- 
 dent, 162 
 but of persons, 152 
 proved from Scripture, 164 
 Political estate, 618 
 Pope, the, the great Antichrist, 650 
 Possession, corporeal, by evil spirits, 223 
 Positive depravity, 252 
 Potentia and Potestas distinguished, 137 
 Potestas ordinis and potestas clavium, 613 
 Power of the ministry (potestas ordinis 
 — jurisdictionis), keys, 613 
 merely instrumental and delegated, 
 
 614 
 but effectual, 615 
 Powers, human, since the fall, 265, 478 
 irov, of the angels, 211 (das Irgendwo- 
 
 sein) 
 Prayer, 503 
 
 Preadamitic view of Creation, 174 
 Predestination, defined, 281, 294 
 
 the Fathers treat it cautiously, 278 
 attributes of, 282 
 not absolute, 282 
 of the Calvinists, 286, 287, 293 
 in a wider and narrower sense, 291 
 as related to election, 293 
 Presbytery, part of the, in the call of 
 
 ministers, 610 
 Prescience and predestination, 296 
 Presence of Christ in the Holy Supper, 
 
 see Lord's Supper. 
 Preservation and creation contrasted, 
 179, 195 
 
 a divine act, 179 
 Preserving grace, 416 
 Prevenient, preparatory, exciting grace, 
 482 
 
 in how far irresistible, 483 
 Priestly office of Christ, 348 
 Private judgment, right of, 63 
 Procession of the Holy Spirit, 163 
 
 temporal, 164 
 7rp6yvo)Gig, 185 
 
 irp66e<7ig and Ttpdyvucng, contrasted, 184, 
 292 
 with dioiK7?(USi 184 
 also with rrpooptajudg, 184 
 Trpovoia, 183 
 npovor]T7jQi 183 
 ivpoopia/iog, 284, 292 
 
 Propagation of original sin, 256 
 
 of human souls, 176, 257 
 Propensity to evil, 243 
 Prophetic office of Christ, 346 
 Prophets of thejOld Testament, 347 
 Propitiation, see Sacerdotal Office of 
 
 Christ 
 Propositions, personal, 308, 326 
 TrpdadrjKrj fteydXr/, 341 
 TrpooTiqipic, 310 
 npoeuTvov, 154 
 TTporagig, 183 
 Providence, defined, 182 
 
 universal, concerning good and evil, 
 182, 200 
 
 ordinary and extraordinary, 182, 
 200 
 
 general and special, 198 
 
 primary and secondary objects of, 
 192 
 
 in the beginning, progress and end 
 of human life, 198 
 
 scriptural proof of, 183 
 
 can it be deceived? 189 
 
 determines contingent actions, 188 
 
 employs second causes, 182 
 
 special objects of, 197 
 
 grades of, 197 
 
 summarily stated, 201 
 
 Epicurean view of (carnalism), 196 
 Psychical body, 407, 643 
 Psychopannychism, 634 
 Punishment, divine, 242 
 
 eternal, 658, sqq. 
 Pure and mixed articles of faith, 48, 106 
 Purgatory, 627, 639 
 Purity of original text of Scripture, 61 
 Purorum naturalium, 228 
 (j>vGig, 150 
 Pyx (sacramental receptacle), 533, 577 
 
 Quakers controverted, 460 
 
 Qualifications needed in an interpreter 
 of Scripture, 79 
 
 Qualitas, defined, 674 
 
 Qualities, personal, internal and exter- 
 nal, 192, 306, 308 
 
 Quietists controverted, 177, 460, 511 
 
 Rathman, on an internal Word, 52, 510 
 perspicuity of the Scripture, 84 
 power of the divine Word, 510, 511 
 
 Real presence, see Lord's Supper 
 
 Reason, defined, 39, 41 
 
 how related to Revelation, 40, 42 
 before and after the fall, 40, 45 
 of man, unrenewed and renewed, 
 40, 45 
 
INDEX, 
 
 687 
 
 Reaeon teaches nothing contrary to 
 Theology, 42, seq. 
 right, properly so called, 46 
 the organic or instrumental use of, 
 
 47 
 the edificative and destructive use 
 
 of, 47 
 the normal use of, in Theology, 39, 
 
 46 
 no source of Theology, 38, 42 
 no judge of theological controver- 
 sies, 40, 45, seq. 
 as related to the mystery of the 
 
 Trinity, 143 
 right use of, in Theology, 40, 46 
 Reatus culpse et p cense, 242, 246 
 Reciprocation of natures in Christ, 334 
 Recognition, heavenly, 663 
 Reconciliation with God, 368 
 Redemption, fraternal, by Christ, 300 
 defined and illustrated, 375 
 application of, 413, seq. 
 Regal office of Christ, 376 
 Regeneration, a divine act, 464, 467 
 
 conditioned by the conduct of men, 
 
 465 
 instantaneous, successive, 469 
 not a substantial change, 468 
 perfect, amissible, recoverable, 465, 
 
 570 
 by the Word and Baptism, 467, 549 
 of adults and infants contrasted, 
 464, 467, 468, 550 
 Relatio, defined, 438, 439, 674 
 Relation, conjugal. 622, sqq., 
 parental, 621 
 servile, 621 
 
 of angels to space, 211 
 Religion, defined, 30, 34 
 
 characteristics and evidences of the 
 
 true, 31 
 subject-matter of, 35 
 true and false, 31 
 
 the Christian, the true one, 32, seq. 
 Remission of sins, 431 
 Renovation, 228, 491 
 
 a work of God in man, 491 
 co-operation of God in, 491 
 gradual, never complete in this life, 
 
 491, 494 
 starting point and goal of, 493 
 transitive and intransitive, 492 
 in a wider and narrower sense, 491 
 and justification contrasted, 492 
 the Holy Spirit, the terminative 
 cause of, 495 
 Repentance, consists of contrition and 
 faith, 473 
 and see Contrition and Penitence. 
 Repletive presence, 566 
 
 Reprobation, adjuncts and cause of, 233, 
 369 
 
 contrasted with predestination, 283 
 
 God not the cause of, 299 
 Res ccelestis, in the Sacraments, 530 
 Resurrection of Christ, 385, 406 
 
 design of, 407 
 
 of the body, 628, 641, seq. 
 
 of martyrs, 652 
 Retribution, final, 656 
 Reus culpse et p cense, 430 
 Revelation, defined, 36, 59 
 
 demonstrated, modes of, 37 
 
 differs from inspiration, 59 
 
 now no immediate, 39 
 
 progressive, 37 
 
 natural and supernatural, 36 
 
 general and special, 36 
 
 the source of Theology, 37 
 Right hand of God, 409, seq. 
 Righteousness, original, 252 
 
 original, not a supernatural gift, 
 238 
 
 civil, 273 
 
 of faith, 435, 439, 446 
 
 carnal, 273 
 
 of Christ, Romanist sense of, 441 
 Ritualism, 78 
 
 Roman Catholics, concerning inspira- 
 tion, 54 
 
 relation of the Church to Scripture, 
 70 
 
 perfection of Scripture, 66 
 
 tradition, 78 
 
 articles of faith, 104, 78 
 
 state of integrity, 228 
 
 image of God, 238 
 
 sensuous appetite, 233, 258 
 
 justifying faith, 426 
 
 justification, 440 
 
 conversion, 474 
 
 mystical union, 491 
 
 intention of minister, 535 
 
 efficacy of Sacraments, exopere ope- 
 rate, 535 
 
 efficacy of Baptism, 549 
 
 doctrine of Transubstantiation, 575 
 
 communion of the laity, 575 
 
 adoration of the host, 576 
 
 head of the Church, 589, 603 
 
 distinction between visible and in- 
 
 ■ visible Church, 597 
 
 marks of the Church, 599 
 
 power to convoke councils, 605 
 
 indelible character of ordination, 613 
 
 state of the soul after death, 637, 
 sqq. 
 Rule of faith and practice, the Scrip- 
 tures, 70, 94 
 Riis, on " the right hand of God," 412 
 
688 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 Sabbath of the soul, eternal, 461 
 Sabellianism unscriptural, 147, seq., 331 
 Sacerdotal office of Christ, 348, seq. 
 Sacramental presence, see Lord's Supper, 
 564 
 union in Baptism, 545 
 union, mode of, 562, 572 
 eating, defined bv the Calvinists, 
 
 570, 573 
 conjunction, 574 
 consecration, 575 
 Sacramentarians, 560 
 Sacraments, in general, 524 
 are the visible Word, 505 
 primary design of, 536 
 defined, 524 
 
 secondary design of, 539 
 only two, 524 
 three in the Apology, 528 
 form of, 524 
 by whom to be administered, 525, 
 
 534 
 necessity of, 538 
 variously defined, 526 
 number of, 524 
 true conception of, 527, 529 
 false views of, 536 
 threefold meaning of, 527 
 of the Old Testament, 539 
 require a twofold material, 529, 531, 
 
 563 
 faith in the administrator, not 
 necessary, 535 
 
 in the recipient essential, 536 
 efficacy of, 534 
 Sacrifice, see Sacerdotal Office of Christ, 
 Salvation, sources of, 278 
 Samosatenus, on the person of Christ, 
 
 323 
 Sanctification, see Renovation, 
 Satan, 220 
 
 as related to man's original'sin, 242, 
 244 
 Satisfaction, defined, 349, 353, 372 
 
 contrasted with merit, 361, 367, 372 
 real object of the obedience of 
 
 Christ, 367 
 general, proved against the Calvin- 
 ists, 370, seq. 
 Saving faith, 418 
 Saxon theologians on the humiliation of 
 
 Christ, 398 
 Scandalum (offence), 262 
 axecug, in the res terrena of the Sacra- 
 ments, 536 
 Schism defined, 617 
 
 Schismatics and heretics contrasted, 617 
 Scholastics, on the satisfaction of Christ, 
 368, 370 
 on the mystical union, 491 
 
 Schwenkfeldians, on an internal Word, 
 52 
 on the mystical union, 491 
 Chiliasm of, 652 
 Scriptures, defined, 49 
 
 why called sacred, 49, 50 
 attributes of, 61, 63, seq. 
 causative and normative authority 
 
 of, 61, 64, seq. 
 power of self-interpretation, 80, 84 
 the judge of controversies, 73 
 normative and judicial power of, 63, 
 
 71 
 perfection or sufficiency of, 74, 76 
 sense of, but one original and 
 
 proper, 88 
 directive authority of, 71 
 corrective authority of, 71 
 perspicuity of, 79, 80, seq. 
 natural and spiritual apprehension 
 
 of, 84, 85 
 contain incomprehensible mysteries 
 
 clearly stated, 80 
 no infallible human interpreter of, 
 
 71 
 rules for the interpretation of, 87 
 efficacy of the, 90, 505 
 authority of, not derived from the 
 
 Church, 69 
 self-interpretation of, 80, 84 
 canon of the, 63, 91 
 why written, 50 
 Holy Spirit inseparably united with 
 
 the. 30 
 Holy, the source of Theology, 38 
 principal and instrumental cause of, 
 
 49, 53 
 synomymous designations of, 51 
 identical with the Word of God, 52. 
 the rule of faith and life, 70, 94 
 Second causes, influence of, 187, 191 
 how God concurs with, 188, 191, 
 
 200 
 advent, 655 
 death, 658 
 Seduction of our first parents, 245 
 Self-interpretation of the Scriptures, 80, 
 
 84 
 Self-renunciation of Christ, 387 
 Sending forth of the Son, 161 
 
 of the Holy Ghost, 164 
 Sense of Scripture, but one true, 88 
 literal, tropical, mystical, 88 
 allegorical, parabolical, 89 
 Serpent, the instrumental cause of orig- 
 inal sin, 242 
 Servile estate, 621 
 
 Sessio Christi ad deztram Dei, 386, 410 
 Sibylline books, 653 
 Sight of God, beatific, 662 
 
INDEX. 
 
 689 
 
 Sin, in general, 239 
 
 original, defined. 242, 243 
 
 originating and originated, 249, 
 
 seq. 
 proofs of, 250 
 negative and positive, 252 
 hereditary, 243 
 indwelling, 250. 255 
 not a mere accident, 254 
 not the substance of man, 255 
 as affected by baptism, 251 
 how perpetuated, 256 
 duration of, 257 
 consequences of, 240, 242, 244, 
 
 254 
 God not the cause of, 239, 241 
 the true cause of, 239, 241, 244 
 actual, defined, 258, 260 
 division of, 258 
 venial and mortal, 26 
 first, of man, 545, sqq. 
 against conscience, fourfold, 260 
 against the Son of Man, 265 
 against the Holy Ghost, 259, 
 
 263, 264 
 why unpardonable, 264 
 voluntary, 260, 272 
 involuntary, 281 
 Sins, pardonable and unpardonable, 261 
 of ignorance and infirmity, 261 
 of various kinds, 258, 262 
 Sinless perfection, 494 
 Sinlessuess of Christ, 302, 308 
 
 of the good angels, 217 
 Sitting of Christ at God's right hand, 
 
 337, seq.. 386, seq., 410 
 Sleep of the soul, 634 
 Socinian errors, concerning the know- 
 ledge of God, 117 
 the sacrifice of Christ. 364 
 the sensuous appetite, 
 the offices of Christ, 355 
 the mystical union, 491 
 inspiration of the Scriptures, 61 
 Soul, the human, 175, sqq. 
 immortality of, 626 
 after death, 626, 635 
 created or propagated? 175 
 Source of Theology, 36 
 Sources of salvation, 277, sqq. 
 Special intercession of Christ, 352 
 
 faith, 418 
 Spectres. 224 
 
 Spirit, witness of the, see Testimony 
 Spiration. active and passive, 163 
 Spirits, complete, incomplete, 208 
 Spiritual possession, 223 
 Spiritual death, 246 
 
 Spiritual acts, in the liberum arbitrium, 
 269, seq. 
 
 Spiritual essence, 674 
 
 Sponsors, 553 
 
 Stancarus, on the office of Christ, 345 
 
 on justification, 441 
 State of corruption. 272 
 States of Christ, Humiliation, 382, 384 
 
 Exaltation, 382, 385 
 
 different, of man, 228 
 Status purorum naturalium, 238 
 ars^dvuaig, 391 
 
 Style of the Xew Testament, 58 
 Subsistentia, defined, 674 
 Substance, defined, 674 
 
 complete and incomplete, 674 
 Sufficiency of the Scriptures, 74, 76 
 (jvvaidiog, 151 
 ovvdpofir}, concurrence of mind and will. 
 
 267 
 <7vva/u(boTEpi(j[i6g, 321 
 avvdvacug, 316 
 cvvepyog, man with God in conversion, 
 
 483 
 cvvderog, 314 
 Gvynandflaotg, 58 
 Supposition, defined, 153, 674 
 Symbolical books, in what sense neces- 
 sary, 111 
 Symbols of the Church, 110 
 
 wherein they differ from the Scrip- 
 tures, 110 
 
 earlier and later, 103 
 
 necessity of, 111 
 Syncretism, 78 
 Synergism, 270 
 
 of Melanchthon, 271, 484 
 Swabian theologians, on the person of 
 
 Christ, 340 
 Synods, see Councils 
 
 raTreivcoGig, 334 
 
 TdTTEivooig v-oraKTiKr], 334, 389 
 
 Temptation of the evil angels, 220 
 
 of our first parents, 245 
 Terminative, 159, 495 
 Terrestrial material in the Sacraments, 
 
 531, 563, 543 
 Testament, Old, not equal in clearness 
 to the Xew, 165 
 Sacraments of, 538. seq. 
 Testaments, Old and Xew, not identical 
 
 with Law and Gospel, 514, 520 
 Testimony of the Church, 71, sqq. 
 
 Holy Spirit, internal, 66, 430 
 Gava-odelg, 403 
 
 Theodoret, on the person of Christ, 333 
 Theodosius, code of, on divorce, 625 
 QeoyvoMJia, 119 
 Theologian, defined, 29 
 
 regenerate and unregenerate, 29 
 
690 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 Theology, in general, 25 
 
 denned, 25 
 
 wider and narrower sense of, 26 
 
 original and derived, 26 
 
 a practical science, 28 
 
 subject matter of, 28 
 
 source of, 36, seq. 
 
 relation of, to Philosophy, 41, 42 
 
 objective end of, 115 
 
 archetypal, 27 
 
 catechetical and acroamatic, 29 
 Theology, fourfold sense of, 26 
 
 eKTvrrog, apxirvirog, 26 
 
 a habitus pr adieus, 27 
 
 of the way and of the home, 27 
 
 natural, revealed, catechetical, 25 
 
 acroamatic, exegetical, didactic, 
 polemic, homiletic, casuistic, 29 
 
 subject of, Religion, 30 
 
 source of, Revelation, 36, 37 
 Qeottvevctoc, 53, 54, 94 
 Qeorroir/aig, 341 
 Oecng, 388 
 
 Threefold office of Christ, 344, seq. 
 Thummius, on the humiliation of Christ, 
 
 396 
 Tradition, oral and dogmatical, to be re- 
 jected, 74, 76, 78 
 
 ritual, of the Church, 78 
 
 various senses of the term, 77, 78 
 
 not a source of faith, 39 
 Traducianism (traduction), 175, 257 
 Trance, 460 
 
 Translations of the Scriptures, no final 
 anthority in controversies, 63 
 
 not inspired, 74 
 Transmigration of souls, 636 
 Transmission of original sin, 244, 256 
 Transubstantiation, 559, 574 
 Trent, Council of, on Confession, 475 
 Trinity, a mystery, 138 
 
 why stated in terms not scriptural, 
 but philosophical, 138, 148 
 
 of persons, not of essence or acci- 
 dent, 140, 165 
 
 intimations of, among the heathen, 
 144 
 
 foreshadowed in the creature, 144, 
 145 
 
 how made known, 146 
 
 not taught by reason, 139 
 
 a fundamental doctrine, 146 
 
 no new doctrine, 148, 139 
 
 summarily stated, 149 
 
 triune, not threefold, 150, seq. 
 
 scriptural proof of, 149, 166 
 
 Aquinas on the, 145 
 
 Athanasius on the, 148 
 
 Augustine on the, 148, 155 
 Trichotomy, no, of human nature, 175 
 
 Tripartite, human nature not, 175 
 Tropical sense of Scripture, 88 
 rpoirog vrrdp^eug, 141 
 rpoirog avriddaeug, 333 
 Trust, see Confidence 
 D^tf, 229 
 
 Tubingen Dogmaticians vs. those of 
 
 Giessen, 398 
 Typical sense of Scripture, 89 
 Turks, 653 
 
 TJbi, definitivum, repletivum, circumscripti- 
 
 vum., occupativum, 211 
 Ubietas definiliva, 203 
 Ubiety of the flesh of Christ, 339 
 Unbelief of our first parents, 245 
 
 final, cause of reprobation, 299 
 Union, personal, 302 
 
 mode and attributes of, 313 
 mystical, 485, seq. 
 
 special, general, 489 
 not transubstantiation or con- 
 substantiation, 490 
 Sacramental, in Baptism, 545 
 
 in the Lord's Supper, 559, 573, 
 seq. 
 vLodecia, 160 
 Unity of the divine essence, 140 
 
 univocal, equivocal, and analogical 
 contrasted, 124 
 Universality of grace, 286 
 Unworthy guests at the Lord's table, 579 
 virapaig nai virap^ig, 119, 154 
 vTvapxtov, 390 
 virepEVTvyxdvetV) 374 
 VTvepvipamg, 334, 341, 391 
 irtTOGTaccg, 153 
 vcpiardfievov, 153 
 
 Venial sins, 261 
 
 Verbal inspiration, 58 
 
 Versions of Scripture, efficacious in pro- 
 ducing faith, 74, 96 
 
 Vestigium and image contrasted, 229 
 
 Via eminentise, negationis et causalitatis, 
 131, seq. 
 
 Vicarious sacrifice of Christ, 368 
 
 Vision of God, heatific, 662, 664 
 
 Vocation (the call), 415, 448 
 defined, 450 
 direct and indirect, 448 
 general and special, 448, 451 
 mediate and immediate, 449, 452 
 ordinary and extraordinary, 449,452 
 particular and universal, 450, 455 
 (calls) three general, 449, 453 
 to the ministry, mediate and imme- 
 diate, by the Church, 610 
 
INDEX, 
 
 691 
 
 Volition, uncoerced, essential to the -will, 
 
 267 
 Vortius, on the conception of Christ, 311 
 Vowel points, inspiration of, 59 
 
 Wafers, consecrated but not used, 576 
 
 not united with the body of Christ, 
 578 
 Warfare, the Christian, 503 
 Weigelians. on the internal Word, 52 
 
 on the mystical union, 491 
 Wicked partake of the body and blood 
 
 in the Lord's Supper, 578 
 Will of God, antecedent and consequent, 
 289 
 
 benevolent, 281 
 
 conditionate, 136, 280, 289 
 
 natural and free, 280 
 
 efficacious and inefficacious, 280 
 
 absolute and ordinate, 280 
 
 general or universal, 280 
 
 special or particular, 280 
 
 universal, attributes of, 280 
 
 of the sign and of the purpose, 288, 
 136 
 
 of man. free? 265 
 
 threefold condition of, 275 
 Wine, of the Holy Supper, 563 
 Wisdom of God, mediate, 135 
 
 of primeval man, 232 
 
 Witness of the Spirit, 66, 430 
 Word, divine. 504, 
 
 efficacy of, 504, 507, 511 
 
 no unwritten, 52 
 
 distinguished into audible and visi- 
 ble, 526 
 
 illuminating power of, 458 
 
 the means of conversion, 506, 512 
 
 and Holy Spirit, inseparable, 508, 
 510 
 
 and Sacraments, the means of 
 grace, 505 
 Works, good, 496, seq. 
 
 wrought only by the regenerate, 
 497 . 
 
 of the unregenerate, 500 
 
 imperfection of, 498 
 
 no ground of justification, 501, seq. 
 
 necessary, 497, 500, seq. 
 
 divine, ad extra, ad intra, 142, 155, 
 159, 167, 169 
 World, not from eternity, 172 
 
 why not sooner created? 173 
 
 annihilation of, 658 
 Worthy reception of the Eucharist, 579 
 
 ZuoTroiTjmc, 401, 403 
 Zwingli, on the person of Christ, 333 
 on the Lord's Supper, 566 
 
EXTRACTS FROM COMMENDATION'S 
 
 OF 
 
 SCHMID'S DOGMATICS 
 
 OF THE 
 
 EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN CHURCH. 
 
 Rev. C. Philip Krauth, D. D., late Prof, in the Theological Seminary of the 
 General Synod. \_Evangelical Review, Vol. i., p. 130.] 
 
 " We think that the increasing desire to become acquainted 
 with the doctrines of the Church and the demand for the Symbo- 
 lical Books are symptomatic of a return to better feelings than 
 have prevailed in regard to the Church, and that the time has 
 passed away in which we are to assume every phase which may 
 be presented to us, to glory that we are like everybody, and con- 
 sequently are nothing in ourselves, living only by the breath of 
 others. These are signs of the times — they mean that the things 
 which have been, can be no more ; that the Church is returning 
 to the sobriety of her better days, and that theology, systematic 
 and biblical, may expect to receive attention such as it deserves. 
 Let, then, the holders of this book, in its translated form, as soon 
 as they can, without incurring loss, bring it out ; and, although 
 their labors will be followed by no pecuniary profit, they will do 
 good ; they will aid in making known the patristic theology of 
 our Church, and prepare the way for an intelligent determination 
 of the extent to which we can subscribe to the orthodoxy of 
 
 other days." 
 
 -+- 
 
 Rev. H. L. Baugher, Sr., D. D., Second President of Pennsylvania Col- 
 lege, Gettysburg, Pa. \_Evangelical Review, Vol. ix. p. 497.] 
 
 "We venture to assert that the Protestant Church of the first 
 two centuries could not have left, humanly speaking, a richer 
 
legacy to posterity, than the learning and piety, and genius and 
 industry, which are embodied in the works to which Schmid re- 
 fers, and which he quotes." 
 
 John G. Morris, D. D., LL. D. 
 
 " Twenty years ago [1875] I projected the translation of it with 
 the assistance of some of our ministers. The edition of that da}r 
 was cut up and parcelled out among my collaborators, all of whom 
 did their work well ; but the condition of Lutheran Theology 
 among many of our clergy of those times was not favorable to its 
 publication ; but laus Deo, times have changed." 
 
 C. Porterfield Krauth, D. D., LL. D., late Norton Professor of Theology in 
 
 the Ev. Lutheran Seminary in Philadelphia, and Vice-Provost of the 
 
 University of Pennsylvania. Mercersburg Review, Vol. i., p. 272. 
 
 To those who have no access to the great sources from which 
 these rich treasures are drawn, a work like this will be of very 
 great value. To those familiar with the great teachers of the 
 Lutheran Church, the work of Schmid would still form a valuable 
 remembrancer and arranger, and to those who have a longing to 
 drink at these wells of undefiled theology, this work which is 
 ably executed would form the guide they need; for, as old 
 Quenstedt, to whom they would often find themselves introduced, 
 has well said in the preface to his great system of Didactic and 
 Polemic Theology: "Scire, ubi aliquid possis invenire, magna 
 pars est eruditionis." 
 
 Rev. C. F. Schaeffer, D. D., late Chairman of Faculty of the Philadelphia 
 Theological Seminary. 
 
 Any one who desires to know what the genuine Lutheran 
 Church really teaches will find the whole matter most faithfully 
 presented in H. Schmid's Dogmatik, in the German text, and in 
 the extensive Latin quotations. 
 
 I have often regretted that this unexceptionable work was not 
 accessible to oar English-speaking members, as its value cannot 
 
be too highly estimated. Hence, I rejoice that you now give us 
 the hope that an English translation will soon appear. 
 
 Dr. H. Schmid's plan is so plain and intelligible, and his 
 treatment of the matter is so faithful and satisfactory, that the 
 reader who examines his work will clearly see what the doctrines 
 of the Lutheran Church really are, and how fully they are sup- 
 ported by the Word of God, from which, indeed, they are de- 
 rived. 
 
 Rev. J. A. Brown, D. D., LL. D., late Chairman of the Faculty of the 
 Theological Seminary of the General Synod. 
 
 I know of no of no single volume that so fairly and fully ex- 
 hibits the Lutheran Theology of the Symbolical Books and of 
 the post-Eeformation period, and I should think a good transla- 
 tion would find a ready and continuous sale. It deserves a con- 
 spicuous place among the standard works of Protestant Theol- 
 ogy- 
 
 Rev. J. A. Seiss, D. D., LL. D., President of the General Council, 
 Philadelphia, Pa. 
 
 It is altogether one of the most ready helps and one of the 
 most successful attempts in that line with which I am acquainted. 
 It is library of our old dogmaticians in itself. It will be a 
 rich treasure to our people and ministers who may not be able to 
 use it in the original, and will supply a place which much learn- 
 ing and expense would be required to supply without it. I 
 should think that ministers and students of all classes, at all in- 
 terested in knowing the doctrines of our Church, and the meth- 
 ods of our great old divines in stating them, would likewise be 
 happy to possess in so small a compass so satisfactory a presenta- 
 tion in the exact language of those divines themselves. 
 
 Rev. Prof. C. F. W. Walther, D. D., Prof, in the Theological Seminary of 
 the Missouri Synod at St. Louis. 
 
 In the first place, as to the theological works from which the 
 citations in Schmid's work are taken, and which constitute the 
 
principal part of it, they exhibit, not only according to the judg- 
 ment of all Lutherans who are faithful to the Confession, the very 
 best results that have ever been attained in the Christian Church 
 of all ages, so far as correct presentation, thorough development 
 and organic arrangement of the doctrines of the Bible are con- 
 cerned, and are therefore of imperishable value, but even accord- 
 ing to the testimony of men who do not unreservedly subscribe to 
 the Confession of our Church, yea even of its enemies, those 
 works belong to the most admirable productions of the earnest 
 spirit of Christian research, which even now every one must make 
 himself perfectly familiar with, if he wish to learn the doctrines 
 of our Church in their peculiar features, their wealth, and their 
 self-consistency; or even if, in general, he wish to be capable of 
 forming a well- tested judgment in the department of Dogmatics. 
 In the second place, as to the work of Dr. Schmid himself, it is 
 doubtless by far the best of all modern works of this kind that 
 aim at setting forth historically the doctrines of our Church. 
 
 Rev. Prof. M. Loy, D. D., Professor in the Evang. Luth. Theol. Seminary, 
 
 Columbus, Ohio. 
 
 Those who have not access to the old masters in theological 
 science will find it an invaluable aid in their studies, and those 
 who have, may be incited by it to obtain a more thorough ac- 
 quaintance with their matchless productions. The most emi- 
 nent of modern theologians would profit by a careful study of the 
 learned and profound works of the 16th and 17th centuries, of 
 which this book furnishes a well- arranged compend. May the 
 work, notwithstanding that the text in a few instances fails to 
 state the Lutheran doctrine with precision, meet in its English 
 dress with the reception which its copious collection of extracts 
 from the best Lutheran writers on systematic theology and its 
 generally lucid exhibition of Scripture truth so richly merit. 
 
 Rev. Prof. Sigismund Fritschel, D. D., Prof, in the Theological Seminary 
 of the Ev. Lutheran German Synod of Iowa, Mendota, 111. 
 
 To direct the attention of the American public, by means of 
 the translation of this excellent work into English, to the rich 
 
5 
 
 treasures of the Old Lutheran Theology, and thus to make these 
 generally accessible to the English-speaking portion of the Luth- 
 eran Church in America, is an extremely gratifying and thank- 
 worthy undertaking, which is sure to have a blessed effect. For 
 the older theology of our Lutheran Church needs only to be 
 known to be respected, and iudeed to be most highly respected ; 
 and many a one, who is still prejudiced against the strictly con- 
 fessional tendency, will, despite the undeniably stiff and scholastic 
 style of the old masters, nevertheless find in their presentation of 
 Christian doctrine, so clear, so thorough, resting so completely 
 upon the most positive assurance of the truth, and adhering so 
 immovably to the words of Sacred Scripture, the means of satis- 
 fying a long and deeply felt want, and be won over to the con- 
 fessional position. 
 
 Rev. M. Valentine, D. D., LL. D., Chairman of the Faculty of the Theo- 
 logical Seminary, Gettysburg, Pa. 
 
 Both as a work of great intrinsic excellence and as a standard 
 representative of the older theology of the Lutheran Church, the 
 volume must be one of high value and interest, not only to Luth- 
 eran ministers and students, but to the clergy of other denomina- 
 tions. 
 
 Rev. S. Sprecher, D. D., LL. D., President of Wittenberg Theological 
 Seminary, Springfield, Ohio. 
 
 Though it is to be regretted that the limits and design of 
 Schmid's book did not allow him to discriminate more fully be- 
 tween the earlier confessional period and the later scholastic era 
 of orthodoxy, and to point out more particularly the difference 
 between the Church theology as it existed before, and then after 
 the exclusion of the Melanchthonian element ; yet, with these 
 explanations, I am ready to say with Kahnis, " That the pure 
 objective presentation of Schmid's Dogmatik, with its rich ex- 
 tracts from original sources, has just claims, 1 ' and that it will in- 
 troduce the reader to the grandest dogmatic structure which has 
 ever been reared.